• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.85 no.1
• /
• pp.138-146
• /
• 2024

Purpose To evaluate whether the image quality of chest radiographs obtained using a camera-type portable X-ray device is appropriate for clinical practice by comparing them with traditional mobile digital X-ray devices. Materials and Methods Eighty-six patients who visited our emergency department and underwent endotracheal intubation, central venous catheterization, or nasogastric tube insertion were included in the study. Two radiologists scored images captured with traditional mobile devices before insertion and those captured with camera-type devices after insertion. Identification of the inserted instruments was evaluated on a 5-point scale, and the overall image quality was evaluated on a total of 20 points scale. Results The identification score of the instruments was 4.67 ± 0.71. The overall image quality score was 19.70 ± 0.72 and 15.02 ± 3.31 (p < 0.001) for the mobile and camera-type devices, respectively. The scores of the camera-type device were significantly lower than those of the mobile device in terms of the detailed items of respiratory motion artifacts, trachea and bronchus, pulmonary vessels, posterior cardiac blood vessels, thoracic intervertebral disc space, subdiaphragmatic vessels, and diaphragm (p = 0.013 for the item of diaphragm, p < 0.001 for the other detailed items). Conclusion Although caution is required for general diagnostic purposes as image quality degrades, a camera-type device can be used to evaluate the inserted instruments in chest radiographs.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.17-29
• /
• 2015

Purpose For nuclear medicine technologists, it is difficult to stay away from or to separate from radiation sources comparing with workers who are using radiation generating devices. Nuclear medicine technologists work is recognized as an optimized way when they are familiar with work practices. The aims of this study are to measure radiation exposure of technologists working in PET and to evaluate the occupational radiation dose after implementation of strategies to lower exposure. Materials and Methods We divided into four working types by QC for PET, injection, scan and etc. in PET scan procedure. In QC of PET, we compared the radiation exposure controlling next to $^{68}Ge$ cylinder phantom directly to controlling the table in console room remotely. In injection, we compared the radiation exposure guiding patient in waiting room before injection to after injection. In scan procedure of PET, we compared the radiation exposure moving the table using the control button located next to the patient to moving the table using the control button located in the far distance. PERSONAL ELECTRONIC DOSEMETER (PED), Tracerco$^{TM}$ was used for measuring exposed radiation doses. Results The average doses of exposed radiation were $0.27{\pm}0.04{\mu}Sv$ when controlling the table directly and $0.13{\pm}0.14{\mu}Sv$ when controlling the table remotely while performing QC. The average doses of exposed radiation were $0.97{\pm}0.36{\mu}Sv$ when guiding patient after injection and $0.62{\pm}0.17{\mu}Sv$ when guiding patient before injection. The average doses of exposed radiation were $1.33{\pm}0.54{\mu}Sv$ when using the control button located next to the patient and $0.94{\pm}0.50{\mu}Sv$ when using the control button located in far distance while acquiring image. As a result, there were statistically significant differences(P<0.05). Conclusion: From this study, we found that how much radiation doses technologists are exposed on average at each step of PET procedure while working in PET center and how we can reduce the occupational radiation dose after implementation of strategies to lower exposure. And if we make effort to seek any other methods to reduce technologist occupational radiation, we can minimize and optimize exposed radiation doses in department of nuclear medicine. Conclusion From this study, we found that how much radiation doses technologists are exposed on average at each step of PET procedure while working in PET center and how we can reduce the occupational radiation dose after implementation of strategies to lower exposure. And if we make effort to seek any other methods to reduce technologist occupational radiation, we can minimize and optimize exposed radiation doses in department of nuclear medicine.