Abstract: Medical diagnostic and therapeutic procedures involving X-rays have become integral to modern healthcare, enabling clinicians to make accurate diagnoses and provide targeted treatments for various medical conditions. However, the use of X-rays poses potential health risks to both patients and healthcare workers due to exposure to ionizing radiation. Shielding materials are essential to mitigate these risks by effectively attenuating radiation. This study aims to evaluate the current usage of X-ray shielding materials and the extent to which they align with the recommended global standards set by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The goal is to enhance the safety of patients and healthcare workers by ensuring the proper use of shielding materials in hospitals. By comparing current practices with global standards, the research seeks to identify gaps in radiological protection—crucial for minimizing harmful radiation exposure and safeguarding the health of individuals in medical facilities. Additionally, the study aims to highlight areas for improvement to ultimately enhance radiation safety practices. A total of 109 respondents from 46 healthcare facilities participated in the study. These respondents included radiologists, radiology technicians, and radiology assistants working in hospitals with functional radiology departments utilizing X-ray machines within the study area. The study employed a descriptive cross-sectional research design to systematically collect and analyze data from randomly selected hospitals in the Enugu metropolis, using structured questionnaires. For each facility, the modal score was used. Privately owned facilities made up 70% of the total, followed by faith-based (13%) and government-owned facilities (13%), with only 4% owned by corporate organizations. In terms of healthcare levels, secondary health facilities constituted the largest proportion (33%), followed by primary health facilities (30%), specialist facilities (26%), and tertiary health facilities (11%). The findings reveal significant variation in compliance with the recommended global standards, with compliance levels ranging from high to medium and low across different facility types and ownership categories. Factors influencing compliance were also identified. Private-for-profit facilities demonstrated the highest level of adherence, with 82% of their facilities achieving high compliance. Faith-based and corporate organizations each accounted for 7% of the high compliance group, while government-owned facilities lagged behind, contributing only 4% to the high compliance category.
Madu et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: