Evaluation of Radiation Dose Received by Trauma Patients in | 47523

Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science
eISSN No. 2347-2367 pISSN No. 2347-2545

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Evaluation of Radiation Dose Received by Trauma Patients in Majmaah Area, Saudi Arabia

Author(s): Yousif Mohamed Y Abdallah*, Nouf Abuhadi, Abdulrahman Alzandi and Tariq Alqahtani


Background: Radiation exposure is the main hazard in medical X-ray investigations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiation dose received in chest x-rays for trauma patients in the Majmaah area. The results were compared with other national and international findings. Furthermore, the reference radiation dose level was measured for different examinations by conventional x-rays. Thus, conventional X-ray examination of trauma patients was investigated.

Materials and Methods: Seven hundred patients were evaluated at King Khalid Hospital, Majmaah. The average and range of exposure parameters were 73.5 ± 9.1 (65.9–124.9) and 2.7 ± 0.71 (0.2–9.6) for X-ray tube potential (kVp) and current multiplied by the exposure time (s) (mAs), respectively.

Results: The entrance surface air kerma dose measured for chest (PA), skull (AP and LAT), lumbosacral (AP and LAT), and knee joint (AP and LAT) were 0.20+0.07 with a range of 0.13–0.37, 0.86 ± 0.01 with a range of 0.09–2.92 and 0.09 ± 0.02 with a range of 0.04–0.17, 0.10 ± 0.02 with a range of (0.04–0.17 and 0.1 ± 0.02 with a range of 0.03–0.16, and 0.86 ± 0.01 with a range of 0.09–2.92, respectively. The measured doses for pediatric patients were 0.20 ± 0.07 (0.13–0.37) and 0.18 ± 0.03 (0.06–0.23) for female and male patients, respectively.

Conclusion: It was concluded that 90% of the procedures had normal findings. However, a precise justification is required, especially for young patients. For dose measurement techniques, the machine- and patient-related factors must be fixed in order to obtain accurate results.

Share this article