DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Level of radiation dose in university hospital non-insured private health screening programs in Korea

  • Lee, Yun-Keun (Wonjin Institute for Occupational and Environmental Health)
  • Received : 2015.12.24
  • Accepted : 2016.03.22
  • Published : 2016.01.01

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study is to evaluate radiation exposure resulting from the comprehensive health examinations of selected university hospital programs and to present basic data for research and management strategies on the health effects of medical radiation exposure. Methods Radiation-based diagnostic studies of the comprehensive health examination programs of ten university hospitals in Seoul, Korea, as introduced in their websites, were analyzed. The medical radiation studies of the programs were reviewed by radiologists. Only the effective doses of the basic studies were included in the analysis. The optional studies of the programs were excluded. Results Among the 190 comprehensive health examination programs, 132 programs (69.5%) included computed tomography studies, with an average of 1.4 scans. The average effective dose of radiation by program was 3.62 mSv for an intensive program for specific diseases; 11.12 mSv for an intensive program for cancer; 18.14 mSv for a premium program; and 24.08 mSv for an overnight program. A higher cost of a programs was linked to a higher effective dose (r=0.812). The effective doses of the examination programs for the same purposes differed by as much as 2.1 times by hospital. Inclusion of positron emission tomography-computed tomography was the most critical factor in determining the level of effective dose. Conclusions It was found that radiation exposure dose from comprehensive health exam programs targeted for an asymptomatic, healthy public reached between 3.6 and 24 times the annual dose limit for the general public. Relevant management policies at the national level should be provided to minimize medical radiation exposure.

Keywords

References

  1. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357(22):2277-2284. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra072149
  2. Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety. Assessment of radiation risk for the Korean population. Daejeon: Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety; 2007, p. 186 (Korean).
  3. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. The national status of medical radiation effective dose per year: 2007-2011; 2014 [cited 2015 Nov 23]. Available from: http://www.mfds.go.kr/index.do?seq=22654&mid=675 (Korean).
  4. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Health status; 2015 [cited 2015 Nov 23]. Available from: http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=HEALTH_STAT.
  5. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, McHugh K, Lee C, Kim KP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukemia and brain tumors: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2012;380(9840):499-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0
  6. Huang B, Law MW, Khong PL. Whole-body PET/CT scanning: estimation of radiation dose and cancer risk. Radiology 2009;251(1):166-174. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2511081300
  7. Korea Health Industry Development Institute. Healthcare industry survey for aging. Cheongju: Korea Health Industry Development Institute; 2013, p. 91(Korean).
  8. Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety. Design and construction of radiation dose database for Korean population. Daejeon: Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety; 2005, p. 178-179 (Korean).
  9. Larke FJ, Kruger RL, Cagnon CH, Flynn MJ, McNitt-Gray MM, Wu X, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with low-dose chest CT of average-size participants in the National Lung Screening Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197(5):1165-1169. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.6533
  10. Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 2008;248(1):254-263. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2481071451
  11. Willowson KP, Bailey EA, Bailey DL. A retrospective evaluation of radiation dose associated with low dose FDG protocols in whole-body PET/CT. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 2012;35(1):49-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-011-0119-8
  12. European Commission. Medical radiation exposure of the European population; 2014 [cited 2016 Feb 23]. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/RP180.pdf.
  13. Kim HJ, Kim JW, Lee SH, Kim JY, Kim MY. Radiation exposure through private health examinations in Korea. Korean J Health Promot 2015;15(3):136-140 (Korean). https://doi.org/10.15384/kjhp.2015.15.3.136
  14. Kang YH, Park JS. Radiation dose and lifetime attributable risk of cancer estimates in 64-slice multidetector computed tomography. J Korea Contents Assoc 2011;11(4):244-252 (Korean). https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2011.11.4.244
  15. Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, Prevedello LM, Nawfel RD, Hanson R, et al. Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology 2009;251(1):175-184. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2511081296
  16. Huang B, Ming Law MW, Khong.PL. Whole-body PET/CT scanning: estimation of radiation dose and cancer risk. Radiology 2009;251(1);166-174 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2511081300
  17. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(22):2071-2077. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.440
  18. Albert JM. Radiation risk from CT: implications for cancer screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;201(1):W81-W87. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.9226
  19. Chawla SC, Federman N, Zhang D, Nagata K, Nuthakki S, McNitt-Gray M, et al. Estimated cumulative radiation dose from PET/CT in children with malignancies: a 5-year retrospective review. Pediatr Radiol 2010;40(5):681-686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-009-1434-z
  20. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). ICRP Publication 105. Radiation protection in medicine. Ann ICRP 2007;37(6):1-63.
  21. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Triple-A investment in patients' health: IAEA promotes awareness, appropriateness, audit of ionizing radiation in medicine; 2010 [cited 2016 Feb 23]. Available from: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/triple-investment-patients-health.
  22. Hart D, Hillier MC, Shrimpton PC. Doses to patients from radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray imaging procedures in the UK-2010 review (HPA-CRCE-034); 2012 [cited 2016 Mar 12]. Available from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140714084352/ http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/ 1317134577210.
  23. California Department of Public Health. Information notice regarding Senate Bill (SB) 1237, California Health and Safety (H&S) Code Section 115113; 2011 [cited 2016 Mar 13]. Available from: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/radquip/Documents/RHBSB1237-FAQ.PDF.
  24. Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency. Radiation protection in diagnostic and interventional radiology; 2008 [cited 2016 Feb 23]. Available from: http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps14_1.pdf.
  25. European Commission. Council directive 2013/59/EURATOM; 2013 [cited 2016 Feb 23]. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2014:013:0001:0073:EN:PDF.
  26. United Nations. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. Volume 1: UNSCEAR 2008 report to the General Assembly with scientific annexes; 2010 [cited 2016 Feb 23]. Available from: http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_Annex_B.pdf.

Cited by

  1. Diagnosis and Treatment of Peritonsillar Abscess with Single Enhanced Computed Tomography vol.61, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3342/kjorl-hns.2017.01025
  2. Protection evaluation of non-lead radiation-shielding fabric: preliminary exposure-dose study vol.35, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-018-0338-8