Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBacchim Neto, Fernando Antonio [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorAlves, Allan Felipe Fattori [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMascarenhas, Yvone Maria
dc.contributor.authorGiacomini, Guilherme [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMaués, Nadine Helena Pelegrino Bastos [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorNicolucci, Patrícia
dc.contributor.authorde Freitas, Carlos Clayton Macedo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorAlvarez, Matheus
dc.contributor.authorPina, Diana Rodrigues de [UNESP]
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T17:11:59Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T17:11:59Z
dc.date.issued2017-05-01
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.04.014
dc.identifier.citationPhysica Medica, v. 37, p. 58-67.
dc.identifier.issn1724-191X
dc.identifier.issn1120-1797
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/174588
dc.description.abstractPurpose The aim of the present study was to determine the efficiency of six methods for calculate the effective dose (E) that is received by health professionals during vascular interventional procedures. Methods We evaluated the efficiency of six methods that are currently used to estimate professionals’ E, based on national and international recommendations for interventional radiology. Equivalent doses on the head, neck, chest, abdomen, feet, and hands of seven professionals were monitored during 50 vascular interventional radiology procedures. Professionals’ E was calculated for each procedure according to six methods that are commonly employed internationally. To determine the best method, a more efficient E calculation method was used to determine the reference value (reference E) for comparison. Results The highest equivalent dose were found for the hands (0.34 ± 0.93 mSv). The two methods that are described by Brazilian regulations overestimated E by approximately 100% and 200%. The more efficient method was the one that is recommended by the United States National Council on Radiological Protection and Measurements (NCRP). The mean and median differences of this method relative to reference E were close to 0%, and its standard deviation was the lowest among the six methods. Conclusions The present study showed that the most precise method was the one that is recommended by the NCRP, which uses two dosimeters (one over and one under protective aprons). The use of methods that employ at least two dosimeters are more efficient and provide better information regarding estimates of E and doses for shielded and unshielded regions.en
dc.format.extent58-67
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofPhysica Medica
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAnthropomorphic phantom
dc.subjectEffective dose
dc.subjectInterventional radiology
dc.subjectPersonal dosimetry
dc.titleEfficiency of personal dosimetry methods in vascular interventional radiologyen
dc.typeArtigo
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionSapra Landauer
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade de São Paulo (USP)
dc.contributor.institutionConsult
dc.description.affiliationSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Instituto de Biociências de Botucatu Departamento de Física e Biofísica
dc.description.affiliationSapra Landauer, Rua Cid Silva César, 600
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade de São Paulo (USP) Faculdade de Filosofia Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto Centro de Instrumentação Dosimetria e Radioproteção (CIDRA), Av. Bandeirantes, 3900 Bairro Monte Alegre
dc.description.affiliationSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Departamento de Neurologia, Psicologia e Psiquiatria
dc.description.affiliationConsult, Rua Sinharinha Frota, 1064
dc.description.affiliationSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Departamento de Doenças Tropicais e Diagnóstico por Imagem
dc.description.affiliationUnespSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Instituto de Biociências de Botucatu Departamento de Física e Biofísica
dc.description.affiliationUnespSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Departamento de Neurologia, Psicologia e Psiquiatria
dc.description.affiliationUnespSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Departamento de Doenças Tropicais e Diagnóstico por Imagem
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.04.014
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85019387998
dc.identifier.file2-s2.0-85019387998.pdf
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,792
Localize o texto completo

Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record