Radioprotection 2025, 60( 3), 234 – 241 © M. Almalki et al., Published by EDP Sciences 2025 https:// doi. org / 10.1051 / radiopro / 2025003
Available online at: www. radioprotection. org ARTICLE
Assessment of occupational radiation exposure among various medical professions in interventional cardiology: A five-year study( 2018 – 2022)
M. Almalki 1,*, N. Shubayr 2, A. Alkabkabi 1, A. Aldosari 1 and S. Aldawood 3
1 Ministry of Health, Riyadh, 11176, Saudi Arabia. 2 Department of Diagnostic Radiography Technology, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, 45142, Saudi
Arabia. 3 Department of Physics and Astronomy, College of Science, P. O. BOX 2455, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11451, Saudi Arabia.
Received: 9 August 2024 / Accepted: 31 January 2025
Abstract – Occupational radiation exposure in medical settings is a growing concern, especially in interventional cardiology. This study aims to assess the occupational radiation exposure among medical personnel in interventional cardiology from 2018 to 2022. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the annual mean effective doses( AMED) and the average over a five-year period( MED-5y) among various medical professionals, including anesthesiologists, cardiologists, nurses, radiologists, and radiologic technologists. The effective doses were estimated using thermoluminescent dosimeters and analyzed to compute the AMED and MED-5y. Statistical significance was determined using T-tests and ANOVA, with subsequent Tukey Post-Hoc Tests for specific group comparisons. The AMED varied significantly among professions, with cardiologists experiencing the highest exposure( 3.469 ± 7.81 mSv in 2022). An overall increase in AMED doses was observed from 2018 to 2022. The results of the T-Test showed a significant difference in the radiation exposure across the years under study( p <. 001). The MED-5y were anesthesiologists( 0.62 ± 0.30), cardiologists( 3.23 ± 7.37), nurses( 1.17 ± 0.56), radiologic technologists( 1.13 ± 0.38), and radiologists( 0.86 ± 0.26). The study also found significant differences in MED-5y across professions( F = 14.8, p <. 001). Gender-based analysis indicated significant differences in MED-5y, particularly among nurses and radiologists. The results of this study revealed that the annual effective dose received by anesthesiologists, cardiologists, nurses, radiologists, and radiologic technologists was below the recommended occupational dose limits, as stipulated by both national and international standards.
Keywords: occupational exposure / medical professionals / interventional cardiology / radiation safety
1 Introduction
Interventional cardiology, a critical branch within cardiology, has seen a substantial increase in its role due to the growing prevalence of cardiovascular diseases. Leveraging advanced X-ray imaging modalities such as angiography and fluoroscopy, interventional cardiology facilitates the diagnosis and treatment of various cardiovascular conditions( Buccheri et al., 2017). The World Health Organization( WHO) emphasizes the alarming surge in cardiovascular diseases, which have emerged as the leading cause of mortality globally, accounting for 17.5 million deaths annually in 2012. This figure increased to 17.9 million in 2016 and is projected to reach 22.2 million by 2030( Şahin et al., 2022). This upsurge
* Corresponding author: nshubayr @ jazanu. edu. sa has consequently led to an increase in the volume of procedures in interventional cardiology, thereby amplifying the exposure of medical personnel to radiation( Moreira et al., 2023).
Medical staff in interventional cardiology, especially cardiologists, face higher radiation exposure compared to other medical fields. Techniques central to this specialty, namely angiography and fluoroscopy, significantly contribute to this elevated exposure. A study by revealed that medical personnel in interventional cardiology, particularly cardiologists, experience radiation exposure about ten times higher than their counterparts in diagnostic radiology( Picano et al., 2013; Moreira et al., 2023). The cumulative doses over a 30-year career can range between 50 to 200 mSv, leading to a notable excess cancer risk( Picano et al., 2013; Moreira et al., 2023). Recent observations have raised concerns over the increasing incidence of cataracts and brain cancers among
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License( https:// creativecommons. org / licenses / by / 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.