Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of radiation doses at diagnostic X-ray control panels and outside patient entrance doors in Aizawl district, India

  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to measure the radiation level and estimate the dosage at the control panel (CP) and outside the patient entrance door (PED) of diagnostic X-ray installations. This is important for ensuring the safety of workers and the public, particularly in the study area, where there is no proper radiation monitoring service. A water phantom, 10-L fresh water in a plastic container, was used as the source of scattered radiation. Using an ion-chamber survey meter, the stray radiation rate was measured at the CP and outside the PED for both chest and couch missions. The CPs were fully covered by a protective barrier, providing a negligible exposure rate (i.e., 0.07–4.2 mR/h for chest and 0.21–3.8 mR/h for couch). By contrast, installations that did not properly cover the CP showed relatively high exposures (from 18 to 205 mR/h for chest and 2.4–270 mR/h for couch). The radiation rates outside the PED in installations having lead-lined doors were negligibly low; whereas, in installations having no lead-lining, exposure rates reached as high as 95 and 110 mR/h for chest and couch missions, respectively. The occupational doses were well below the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board dose limit (i.e., 40 mR/week). However, excessive doses were observed in public spaces outside the PED, compared with the dose limit for the public (i.e., 2 mR/week).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Archer BR. History of the shielding of diagnostic X-ray facilities. Health Phys. 1995;69:750–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bushong SC. Radiation protection. In: Ballinger PW, editor. Merrill’s atlas of radiographic positions and radiologic procedures, vol. 1. 7th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book; 1991. p. 17–33.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sun Z, Inskip PD, Wang J, Kwon D, Zhao Y, Zhang L, et al. Solid cancer incidence among Chinese medical diagnostic X-ray workers, 1950–1995: estimation of radiation-related risks. Int J Cancer. 2016;138:2875–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. González AB, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet. 2004;363:345–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Archer BR. Recent history of the shielding of medical X-ray imaging facilities. Health Phys. 2005;88:579–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Atomic Energy Regulatory Board. Safety Code No. AERB/SC/MED-2 (Rev. 1), ‘Safety code for medical diagnostic X-ray equipment and installations’ AERB, Mumbai, 2001.

  7. Binks W. Some aspects of radiation hygiene. Br J Radiol. 1955;28:654–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Grover SB, Kumar J, Gupta A, Khanna L. Protection against hazards: regulatory bodies, safety norms, dose limits and protection devices. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2002;12:157–67.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bennett BG. Exposures from medical radiation world-wide. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 1991;36:237–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Cunha P, Freire B, Drexler G. Occupational exposure in X-ray diagnosis in Brazil. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 1992;43:55–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bushong SC. Radiologic science for technologists: physics, biology, and protection. 10th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Mosby; 2013. p. 578–9.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Osborn SB. Radiation doses received by the diagnostic X-ray workers. Br J Radiol. 1955;28:650–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Carlsson CA, Carlsson GA. Basic physics of X-ray imaging. 2nd ed. Sweden: Linkoping University; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Johns HE, Cunningham JR. The physics of radiology. 4th ed. Springfield: Thomas CC, Publisher; 1983. p. 133–64.

    Google Scholar 

  15. IAEA. Diagnostic radiology physics; a handbook for teachers and students. Austria: IAEA; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chen MYM, Swearingen FL, Mitchell R, Ott DJ. Radiation exposure during ERCP: effect of a protective shield. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;43:1–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cousins C, Sharp C. Medical interventional procedures—reducing the radiation risks. Clin Radiol. 2004;59:468–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Simkin DJ, Dixon RL. Secondary shielding barriers for diagnostic X-ray facilities: scatter and leakage. Health Phys. 1998;74:350–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dixon RL. On the primary barrier in diagnostic X-ray shielding. Med Phys. 1994;21:1785–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee J, Cha ES, Jeong M, Lee WJ. A national survey of occupational radiation exposure among diagnostic radiologic technologists in South Korea. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2015;167(4):525–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Operator Manual 451P Ion Chamber Survey Meter. PN FBC-0059, Rev 1, Fluke Corporation, USA; 2013.

  22. Sonawane AU, Singh M, Kumar SJVK, Kulkarni A, Shirva VK, Pradhan AS. Radiological safety status and quality assurance audit of medical X-ray diagnostic installations in India. J Med Phys. 2010;35:229–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Vlachos I, Tsantilas X, Kalyvas N, Delis H, Kandaraskis I, Panayiotakis G. Measuring scatter radiation in diagnostic X-rays for radiation protection purposes. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2015;165:382–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tsalafoutas IA. Excessive leakage radiation measured on two mobile X-ray units due to the methodology used by the manufacturer to calculate and specify the required tube shielding. Br J Radiol. 2006;79:162–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. NCRP. Report No. 147. Structural shielding design for medical X-ray imaging facilities; 2004.

  26. Lalrinmawia J, Pau KS, Tiwari RC. Qualitative study of mechanical parameters of conventional diagnostic X-ray machines in Mizoram. Radiol Phys Technol. 2018;11:274–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Format for Quality Assurance test for diagnostic X-ray equipment. https://www.aerb.gov.in/images/PDF/DiagnosticRadiology/1-FORMAT-FOR-QUALITY-ASSURANCE-TEST-FOR-DIAGNOSTIC-X-RAY-EQUIPMENT.pdf. Accessed 5 Feb 2019.

  28. Lalrinmawia J, Pau KS, Tiwari RC. Investigations of public dose due to stray radiation in X-ray installations in Mizoram. Science and technology for shaping the future of Mizoram. New Delhi: Allied publishers Pvt. Ltd.; 2017. p. 305–9. ISBN 978-93-85926-49-5.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Operator Manual Victoreen 07-494. Manual No. 168001 Rev 4, Fluke Biomedical, Radiation Management Services, 6045 Cochran Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44139, USA; 2006.

  30. Lalrinmawia J, Pau KS, Tiwari RC. Quality assurance assessment of conventional diagnostic X-ray installations in Mizoram. J Med Phys. 2017;42(Suppl S1):208–9 (ISSN: 0971-6203).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lalrinmawia J, Pau KS, Tiwari RC. Investigations of workers dose due to stray radiation in X-ray installations in Mizoram. Recent advances in physics research and its relevance. New Delhi: Excel India Publishers; 2017. p. 258–63. ISBN 978-93-86256-85-0.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express their sincere thanks to the Committee for Safety Research Program (CSRP), the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB, Mumbai), and the Government of India, for financial assistance through Major Research Project Grant no. AERB/CSRP/58/02/2014 awarded in September 30, 2014.

Funding

This study was funded by the Committee for Safety Research Program (CSRP) and the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB): project number AERB/CSRP/58/02/2014; September 30, 2014.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, Mizoram University, Aizawl, Mizoram, 796004, India

    Jonathan Lalrinmawia & Ramesh Chandra Tiwari

  2. Mizoram State Cancer Institute, Zemabawk, Aizawl, Mizoram, 796017, India

    Jonathan Lalrinmawia & Kham Suan Pau

Authors
  1. Jonathan Lalrinmawia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kham Suan Pau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ramesh Chandra Tiwari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramesh Chandra Tiwari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any human studies. This article does not contain any animal studies.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lalrinmawia, J., Pau, K.S. & Tiwari, R.C. Evaluation of radiation doses at diagnostic X-ray control panels and outside patient entrance doors in Aizawl district, India. Radiol Phys Technol 12, 312–324 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-019-00526-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-019-00526-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation