Occupational radiation exposure among interventional radiology staff at the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital, Nigeria

Background: Interventional radiology (IR) provides minimally invasive image-guided diagnosis and treatment, but fluoroscopy produces scattered ionizing radiation that can expose staff in the procedure room. Individual monitoring and consistent radiation-protection practices are essential for maintaining occupational exposure as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). Objective: To evaluate recorded occupational radiation exposure among IR staff at the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital (UMTH), Nigeria, and describe differences by professional role and selected radiation-safety practices. Methods: This retrospective, single-centre study reviewed thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) records for 26 IR staff members covering March 2025 to February 2026. Structured questionnaire information described professional role, dosimeter use, lead-apron use, radiation-safety training and reported safety-practice frequency. Descriptive results and inferential findings reported in the source thesis were summarised. Because the source did not clearly establish whether the reported dose values were monthly, cumulative, or annualised, they are presented as recorded values rather than annual effective doses. Results: Mean recorded exposure was 0.193 mSv (SD = 0.076; range = 0.09–0.42 mSv). Five staff members (19.2%) were classified in the study-defined high-exposure category (>0.25 mSv), 12 (46.2%) in the moderate category and nine (34.6%) in the low category. Mean exposure was highest among radiologists (0.235 mSv), followed by nurses (0.190 mSv) and radiographers (0.167 mSv). Twenty-two participants (84.6%) reported dosimeter use, 24 (92.3%) reported lead-apron use and 23 (88.5%) reported radiation-safety training. The thesis reported significant associations between exposure and professional role and lead-apron use (p < .05); associations with dosimeter use, training, safety-practice frequency and years of experience were not statistically significant (p > .05). Conclusion: Recorded exposure varied by professional role, and a subset of staff exceeded the study-defined high-exposure threshold. The findings support routine individual monitoring, review of unusual dose readings, consistent use of shielding and targeted radiation-safety training. Interpretation is limited by the small sample and incomplete reporting of the dose quantity and monitoring interval.