Cargando…

How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?

BACKGROUND: The physician's hands are close to the X-ray field in C-arm fluoroscopy-guided pain interventions. We prospectively investigated the radiation attenuation of Proguard RR-2 gloves. METHODS: In 100 cases, the effective doses (EDs) of two dosimeters without a radiation-reducing glove w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Ah Na, Chang, Young Jae, Cheon, Bo Kyung, Kim, Jae Hun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Pain Society 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24748943
http://dx.doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2014.27.2.145
_version_ 1782312344454430720
author Kim, Ah Na
Chang, Young Jae
Cheon, Bo Kyung
Kim, Jae Hun
author_facet Kim, Ah Na
Chang, Young Jae
Cheon, Bo Kyung
Kim, Jae Hun
author_sort Kim, Ah Na
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The physician's hands are close to the X-ray field in C-arm fluoroscopy-guided pain interventions. We prospectively investigated the radiation attenuation of Proguard RR-2 gloves. METHODS: In 100 cases, the effective doses (EDs) of two dosimeters without a radiation-reducing glove were collected. EDs from the two dosimeters-one dosimeter wrapped with a glove and the other dosimeter without a glove- were also measured at the side of the table (Group 1, 140 cases) and at a location 20 cm away from the side of the table (Group 2, 120 cases). Mean differences such as age, height, weight, radiation absorbed dose (RAD), exposure time, ED, and ratio of EDs were analyzed. RESULTS: In the EDs of two dosimeters without gloves, there were no significant differences (39.0 ± 36.3 µSv vs. 38.8 ± 36.4 µSv) (P = 0.578). The RAD (192.0 ± 182.0 radcm(2)) in Group 2 was higher than that (132.3 ± 103.5 radcm(2)) in Group 1 (P = 0.002). The ED (33.3 ± 30.9 µSv) of the dosimeter without a glove in Group 1 was higher than that (12.3 ± 8.8 µSv) in Group 2 (P < 0.001). The ED (24.4 ± 22.4 µSv) of the dosimeter wrapped with a glove in Group 1 was higher than that (9.2 ± 6.8 µSv) in Group 2 (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the ratio of EDs (73.5 ± 6.7% vs. 74.2 ± 9.3%, P = 0.469) between Group 1 and Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Proguard RR-2 gloves have a radiation attenuation effect of 25.8-26.5%. The radiation attenuation is not significantly different by intensity of scatter radiation or the different RADs of C-arm fluoroscopy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3990823
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher The Korean Pain Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39908232014-04-18 How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions? Kim, Ah Na Chang, Young Jae Cheon, Bo Kyung Kim, Jae Hun Korean J Pain Original Article BACKGROUND: The physician's hands are close to the X-ray field in C-arm fluoroscopy-guided pain interventions. We prospectively investigated the radiation attenuation of Proguard RR-2 gloves. METHODS: In 100 cases, the effective doses (EDs) of two dosimeters without a radiation-reducing glove were collected. EDs from the two dosimeters-one dosimeter wrapped with a glove and the other dosimeter without a glove- were also measured at the side of the table (Group 1, 140 cases) and at a location 20 cm away from the side of the table (Group 2, 120 cases). Mean differences such as age, height, weight, radiation absorbed dose (RAD), exposure time, ED, and ratio of EDs were analyzed. RESULTS: In the EDs of two dosimeters without gloves, there were no significant differences (39.0 ± 36.3 µSv vs. 38.8 ± 36.4 µSv) (P = 0.578). The RAD (192.0 ± 182.0 radcm(2)) in Group 2 was higher than that (132.3 ± 103.5 radcm(2)) in Group 1 (P = 0.002). The ED (33.3 ± 30.9 µSv) of the dosimeter without a glove in Group 1 was higher than that (12.3 ± 8.8 µSv) in Group 2 (P < 0.001). The ED (24.4 ± 22.4 µSv) of the dosimeter wrapped with a glove in Group 1 was higher than that (9.2 ± 6.8 µSv) in Group 2 (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the ratio of EDs (73.5 ± 6.7% vs. 74.2 ± 9.3%, P = 0.469) between Group 1 and Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Proguard RR-2 gloves have a radiation attenuation effect of 25.8-26.5%. The radiation attenuation is not significantly different by intensity of scatter radiation or the different RADs of C-arm fluoroscopy. The Korean Pain Society 2014-04 2014-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3990823/ /pubmed/24748943 http://dx.doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2014.27.2.145 Text en Copyright © The Korean Pain Society, 2014 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ 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.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kim, Ah Na
Chang, Young Jae
Cheon, Bo Kyung
Kim, Jae Hun
How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?
title How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?
title_full How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?
title_fullStr How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?
title_full_unstemmed How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?
title_short How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?
title_sort how effective are radiation reducing gloves in c-arm fluoroscopy-guided pain interventions?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3990823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24748943
http://dx.doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2014.27.2.145
work_keys_str_mv AT kimahna howeffectiveareradiationreducingglovesincarmfluoroscopyguidedpaininterventions
AT changyoungjae howeffectiveareradiationreducingglovesincarmfluoroscopyguidedpaininterventions
AT cheonbokyung howeffectiveareradiationreducingglovesincarmfluoroscopyguidedpaininterventions
AT kimjaehun howeffectiveareradiationreducingglovesincarmfluoroscopyguidedpaininterventions