Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals: A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students

H Bijwaard; G de Vries; J Scheurleer; T Roding; H Erenstein; F van Welie; Wim Ravensbergen; Sharon Haarmans-Jonkman

doi:10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005

Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals: A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students

H Bijwaard, G de Vries, J Scheurleer, T Roding, H Erenstein, F van Welie, Wim Ravensbergen, Sharon Haarmans-Jonkman

Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In the Netherlands, hospitals have difficulty in implementing the formal procedure of comparing radiation dose values to Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs).

METHODS: To support the hospitals, train radiography students, and carry out a nationwide dose survey, diagnostic radiography students performed 125 DRL comparisons for nine different procedures in 29 radiology departments. Students were instructed at three Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences with a radiography programme and supervised by medical physicists from the participating hospitals.

RESULTS: After a pilot study in the western part of the country in eight hospitals, this study was enlarged to involve 21 hospitals from all over the Netherlands. The 86 obtained dose comparisons fall below the DRLs in 97% of all cases. This very high compliance may have been enhanced by the voluntary participation of hospitals that are confident about their performance.

CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the current DRLs that were not based on a national survey, may need to be updated, sometimes to half their current value. For chest and pelvis examinations the DRLs could be lowered from 12 and 300 μGy·m 2 to the 75-percentile values found in this study of 5,9 and 188 μGy·m 2, respectively.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	197-201
Number of pages	5
Journal	Radiography
Volume	23
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005
Publication status	Published - Aug 2017

Keywords

Netherlands
Students, Health Occupations
data collection
diagnostic imaging
education
guideline adherence
hospitals
questionnaires
radiation exposure
radiologic technology
reference values
standards
surveys

Access to Document

10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005

Cite this

Bijwaard, H., de Vries, G., Scheurleer, J., Roding, T., Erenstein, H., van Welie, F., Ravensbergen, W., & Haarmans-Jonkman, S. (2017). Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals: A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students. Radiography, 23(3), 197-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005

@article{ed114258a6db4f1a9de1d20ea9c4bab2,

title = "Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals: A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students",

abstract = "INTRODUCTION: In the Netherlands, hospitals have difficulty in implementing the formal procedure of comparing radiation dose values to Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs).METHODS: To support the hospitals, train radiography students, and carry out a nationwide dose survey, diagnostic radiography students performed 125 DRL comparisons for nine different procedures in 29 radiology departments. Students were instructed at three Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences with a radiography programme and supervised by medical physicists from the participating hospitals.RESULTS: After a pilot study in the western part of the country in eight hospitals, this study was enlarged to involve 21 hospitals from all over the Netherlands. The 86 obtained dose comparisons fall below the DRLs in 97% of all cases. This very high compliance may have been enhanced by the voluntary participation of hospitals that are confident about their performance.CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the current DRLs that were not based on a national survey, may need to be updated, sometimes to half their current value. For chest and pelvis examinations the DRLs could be lowered from 12 and 300 μGy·m 2 to the 75-percentile values found in this study of 5,9 and 188 μGy·m 2, respectively. ",

keywords = "Netherlands, Students, Health Occupations, data collection, diagnostic imaging, education, guideline adherence, hospitals, questionnaires, radiation exposure, radiologic technology, reference values, standards, surveys, Nederland, blootstelling, diagnostische beeldvorming, enqu{\^e}tes, gegevensverzameling, naleving, onderwijs, radiologische technologie, referentiewaarden, richtlijnen, straling, vragenlijsten, ziekenhuizen",

author = "H Bijwaard and {de Vries}, G and J Scheurleer and T Roding and H Erenstein and {van Welie}, F and Wim Ravensbergen and Sharon Haarmans-Jonkman",

year = "2017",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005",

language = "English",

volume = "23",

pages = "197--201",

journal = "Radiography",

issn = "1078-8174",

publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",

number = "3",

}

Bijwaard, H, de Vries, G, Scheurleer, J, Roding, T, Erenstein, H, van Welie, F, Ravensbergen, W & Haarmans-Jonkman, S 2017, 'Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals: A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students', Radiography, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 197-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005

TY - JOUR

T1 - Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals

T2 - A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students

AU - Bijwaard, H

AU - de Vries, G

AU - Scheurleer, J

AU - Roding, T

AU - Erenstein, H

AU - van Welie, F

AU - Ravensbergen, Wim

AU - Haarmans-Jonkman, Sharon

PY - 2017/8

Y1 - 2017/8

N2 - INTRODUCTION: In the Netherlands, hospitals have difficulty in implementing the formal procedure of comparing radiation dose values to Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs).METHODS: To support the hospitals, train radiography students, and carry out a nationwide dose survey, diagnostic radiography students performed 125 DRL comparisons for nine different procedures in 29 radiology departments. Students were instructed at three Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences with a radiography programme and supervised by medical physicists from the participating hospitals.RESULTS: After a pilot study in the western part of the country in eight hospitals, this study was enlarged to involve 21 hospitals from all over the Netherlands. The 86 obtained dose comparisons fall below the DRLs in 97% of all cases. This very high compliance may have been enhanced by the voluntary participation of hospitals that are confident about their performance.CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the current DRLs that were not based on a national survey, may need to be updated, sometimes to half their current value. For chest and pelvis examinations the DRLs could be lowered from 12 and 300 μGy·m 2 to the 75-percentile values found in this study of 5,9 and 188 μGy·m 2, respectively.

AB - INTRODUCTION: In the Netherlands, hospitals have difficulty in implementing the formal procedure of comparing radiation dose values to Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs).METHODS: To support the hospitals, train radiography students, and carry out a nationwide dose survey, diagnostic radiography students performed 125 DRL comparisons for nine different procedures in 29 radiology departments. Students were instructed at three Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences with a radiography programme and supervised by medical physicists from the participating hospitals.RESULTS: After a pilot study in the western part of the country in eight hospitals, this study was enlarged to involve 21 hospitals from all over the Netherlands. The 86 obtained dose comparisons fall below the DRLs in 97% of all cases. This very high compliance may have been enhanced by the voluntary participation of hospitals that are confident about their performance.CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the current DRLs that were not based on a national survey, may need to be updated, sometimes to half their current value. For chest and pelvis examinations the DRLs could be lowered from 12 and 300 μGy·m 2 to the 75-percentile values found in this study of 5,9 and 188 μGy·m 2, respectively.

KW - Netherlands

KW - Students, Health Occupations

KW - data collection

KW - diagnostic imaging

KW - education

KW - guideline adherence

KW - hospitals

KW - questionnaires

KW - radiation exposure

KW - radiologic technology

KW - reference values

KW - standards

KW - surveys

KW - Nederland

KW - blootstelling

KW - diagnostische beeldvorming

KW - enquêtes

KW - gegevensverzameling

KW - naleving

KW - onderwijs

KW - radiologische technologie

KW - referentiewaarden

KW - richtlijnen

KW - straling

KW - vragenlijsten

KW - ziekenhuizen

U2 - 10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005

DO - 10.1016/j.radi.2017.03.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 28687286

SN - 1078-8174

VL - 23

SP - 197

EP - 201

JO - Radiography

JF - Radiography

IS - 3

ER -

Compliance to Diagnostic Reference Levels for radiation exposure in common radiological procedures in Dutch hospitals: A nation-wide survey carried out by medical imaging students

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this