Journal List > J Korean Med Assoc > v.54(12) > 1042376

TOOLS
Lee: Current status of medical radiation exposure and regulation efforts
Focused Issue of This Month
Radiation exposure in diagnostic areas
Journal of the Korean Medical Association

Journal of the Korean Medical Association 2011; 54(12): 1248-1252.

Published online: 13 December 2011

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2011.54.12.1248

Current status of medical radiation exposure and regulation efforts

Whal Lee, MD

Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Corresponding author: Whal Lee, whal.lee@gmail.com

Received 10 November 2011       Accepted 20 November 2011

Copyright © 2011 Korean Medical Association

(open-access):

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The radiation exposure from diagnostic medical imaging has increased. The potential risk from radiation exposure of the patient also has increased even though the risk from a small amount of radiation exposure has not been clearly demonstrated. Any medical radiation exposure must be justified and the examinations which use ionizing radiation must be optimized. The education of the referring physician and radiologist are important. However, stronger regulation is essential to control medical radiation exposure. Many national and international organizations have made a significant effort to regulate and monitor medical radiation exposure using guidelines, accreditation, or even laws. Medical radiation exposure must be controlled, and this could be achieved by continuous interest from health professionals and organizations.

Keywords: Radiation protection, Radiation hazard, Computed tomography, Ionizing radiation

Acknowledgement

Supported by grant no 04-2011-0290 from the SNUH Research Fund.

References

1. Kopp AF, Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Georg C, Schroder S, Kuttner A, Martensen J, Claussen CD. Cardiac multidetector-row CT: first clinical results of retrospectively ECG-gated spiral with optimized temporal and spatial resolution. Rofo. 2000. 172:429–435.
crossref
2. Rubins JB. The current approach to the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: lessons from PIOPED II. Postgrad Med. 2008. 120:1–7.
crossref
3. Stein PD, Woodard PK, Weg JG, Wakefield TW, Tapson VF, Sostman HD, Sos TA, Quinn DA, Leeper KV Jr, Hull RD, Hales CA, Gottschalk A, Goodman LR, Fowler SE, Buckley JD. PIOPED II Investigators. Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II Investigators. Radiology. 2007. 242:15–21.
crossref
4. Valentin J. International Commission on Radiological Protection. The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. 2007. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
5. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States: NCRP report no. 160. 2006. Bethesda: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.
6. Source and effects of ionizing radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation [Internet]. United Nations. 2010. cited 2011 Dec 5. New York: United Nations;Available from: http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_Annex_A.pdf.
7. Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology. 2004. 231:393–398.
crossref
8. O'Sullivan J, O'Connor OJ, O'Regan K, Clarke B, Burgoyne LN, Ryan MF, Maher MM. An assessment of medical students' awareness of radiation exposures associated with diagnostic imaging investigations. Insights Imaging. 2010. 1:86–92.
9. Borgen L, Stranden E, Espeland A. Clinicians' justification of imaging: do radiation issues play a role? Insight Imaging. 2010. 1:193–200.
crossref
10. Krille L, Hammer GP, Merzenich H, Zeeb H. Systematic review on physician's knowledge about radiation doses and radiation risks of computed tomography. Eur J Radiol. 2010. 76:36–41.
crossref
11. ACR appropriateness criteria [Internet]. cited 2011 Nov 18. Reston: American College of Radiology;Available from: http://www.acr.org/ac.
12. Guidelines on education and training in radiation protection for medical exposures: radiation protection 116 [Internet]. 2000. cited 2011 Nov 18. Brussels: European Commission;Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/radiation_protection/doc/publication/116.pdf.
13. Draft euratom basic safety standards directive [Internet]. 2010. cited 2011 Nov 18. Brussels: European Commission;Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/radiation_protection/doc/art31/2010_02_24_draft_euratom_basic_safety_standards_directive.pdf.
14. International action plan for the radiation protection of patients [Internet]. cited 2011 Nov 18. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency;Available from:http://rpop.iaea.org/RPOP/RPoP/Content/ArchivedNews/ReportSteeringPanel.htm.
15. California S.B. 1237: radiation dosage. 2010. 06. 23.
16. Radiation protection in diagnostic and interventional radiology [Internet]. 2008. cited 2011 Nov 18. Melbourne: Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency;Available from: http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps14_1.pdf.
17. Inside Radiology [Internet]. cited 2011 Nov 18. Sydney: Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists;Available from: http://www.insideradiology.com.au/.
TOOLS
Similar articles