TY - JOUR
T1 - Proposed diagnostic reference levels for general radiography and mammography in Japan
AU - Asada, Yasuki
AU - Kondo, Yuya
AU - Kobayashi, Masanao
AU - Kobayashi, Kenichi
AU - Ichikawa, Takuma
AU - Matsunaga, Yuta
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Society for Radiological Protection. Published on behalf of SRP by IOP Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs 2015) in Japan were first published in 2017, on the Japan Network for Research and Information on Medical Exposures network. Medical facilities in Japan are now presumably reconsidering radiation doses at their facilities and approaching protection optimisation through the application of DRLs 2015. However, since more than 3 years have elapsed since publication, radiation doses received by patients in Japan may have diverged from DRLs 2015. We therefore undertook the present study. Based on our questionnaire survey implemented in 2017, we estimated the entrance skin dose (ESD) under general radiography fields and the mean glandular dose (MGD) under mammography, to compile a report on the doses received by patients under general radiography fields and mammography, and to propose new DRLs as replacements for DRLs 2015. Radiation doses under general radiography fields and mammography were estimated from the results of the 2017 questionnaire survey and applied to determine new DRLs at 75% values of dose distributions in general radiography fields and at 95% values of dose distributions in mammography. Among all the modes for general radiography fields and mammography, median ESD and MGD were significantly smaller with flat panel detector systems than with computed radiography systems. Comparison of the results with DRLs 2015 values showed a trend toward decreases in all imaging methods of the general radiography fields and mammography ranging from 5.0% (child chest radiography) to 31.7% (skull radiography). Moreover, responses showed that DRLs 2015 were recognised and used for comparison at many facilities. We have described the doses received by patients in general radiography fields and mammography in 2017 and proposed new DRLs as replacements for DRLs 2015. The DRLs we proposed for general radiography fields and mammography were determined to be lower than DRLs 2015 for all modes.
AB - Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs 2015) in Japan were first published in 2017, on the Japan Network for Research and Information on Medical Exposures network. Medical facilities in Japan are now presumably reconsidering radiation doses at their facilities and approaching protection optimisation through the application of DRLs 2015. However, since more than 3 years have elapsed since publication, radiation doses received by patients in Japan may have diverged from DRLs 2015. We therefore undertook the present study. Based on our questionnaire survey implemented in 2017, we estimated the entrance skin dose (ESD) under general radiography fields and the mean glandular dose (MGD) under mammography, to compile a report on the doses received by patients under general radiography fields and mammography, and to propose new DRLs as replacements for DRLs 2015. Radiation doses under general radiography fields and mammography were estimated from the results of the 2017 questionnaire survey and applied to determine new DRLs at 75% values of dose distributions in general radiography fields and at 95% values of dose distributions in mammography. Among all the modes for general radiography fields and mammography, median ESD and MGD were significantly smaller with flat panel detector systems than with computed radiography systems. Comparison of the results with DRLs 2015 values showed a trend toward decreases in all imaging methods of the general radiography fields and mammography ranging from 5.0% (child chest radiography) to 31.7% (skull radiography). Moreover, responses showed that DRLs 2015 were recognised and used for comparison at many facilities. We have described the doses received by patients in general radiography fields and mammography in 2017 and proposed new DRLs as replacements for DRLs 2015. The DRLs we proposed for general radiography fields and mammography were determined to be lower than DRLs 2015 for all modes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089595130&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85089595130&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1088/1361-6498/aba083
DO - 10.1088/1361-6498/aba083
M3 - Article
C2 - 32590370
AN - SCOPUS:85089595130
SN - 0952-4746
VL - 40
SP - 867
EP - 876
JO - Journal of Radiological Protection
JF - Journal of Radiological Protection
IS - 3
ER -