Observational analysis reveals variations in entrance surface dose and dose area product, highlighting the need for improved radiation protection.
Background Entrance surface dose (ESD) and dose area product (DAP) are two standard metrics used to quantify patient radiation exposure during radiological procedures. By assessing ESD and DAP in frequently performed examinations such as chest, abdomen, and pelvic X-rays, healthcare providers at CHR of Daloa can better understand current exposure levels, identify variations, and implement strategies to reduce unnecessary radiation. This study is essential not only for improving patient safety and image quality but also for aligning with international diagnostic reference levels and best practices in radiation protection. Methods The radiological device of the general electric brand consists of a remote-controlled radiological table, equipped with an X-ray tube of model FUJIFILM that was used. Also the DAP meter of model Diamentor M4-KDK type 11,017 was used to measure patient radiological parameters such as dose in air and DAP for each examination. Then, the ESD was calculated and compared to other results. Results A total of 279 examinations were performed in just one month. Results have shown variation in patient doses for each examination. Thus, for ESD values it is shown that the lowest value (0.39 mGy) was obtained in chest examination, while the highest one (21.41 mGy) was found in thorax. As for DAP, the lowest value (2.69 cGy cm² cm 2 ) is shown, while the highest value (374.61 cGy cm²) cm 2 ) was obtained in lumbar examination. The comparison of present study with other results around the World has indicated that patient doses are optimized for some examinations at the CHR of Daloa, while for certain examinations they are not. Conclusion This study by assessing DAP and ESD in frequently performed examinations at CHR of Daloa has allowed to evaluate the optimization of patient doses. However, corrective actions are needed to optimize patient doses for examinations that DAP and ESD values were higher than DRLs values at national and international levels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kezo et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: