888 Radiation protection in public hospitals in abidjan

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid


IntroductionAdvances in medical imaging have helped to better orient the therapeutic strategy and evaluate the effectiveness of treatments. The use of ionising radiation in radiology, however, is not without risks for health professionals directly involved in radiation work.MethodsThe study was cross-sectional and prospective, including medical imaging technicians and engineers selected radiology departments, regularly hired and assigned to radiation work. Data were reported on a self-administered questionnaire.ResultsFive hospitals were selected with 59 participants, including 6 (9%) women, 54 (92%) senior technicians and 5 (8%) engineers. The cumulative age group of 30–50 years constituted 95% of the participants; 16 (27%) participants had been exposed for 5–10 years, 2 (4%) had been exposed for more than 20 years; The risk of cancer (96.6%), radiodermatitis (31%) and infertility (71.4%) were recognised by the participants. The main PPEs identified by the participants as radio-protectors were the lead apron (96.6%), the leaded glove (68.6%), the shells (31%), the anti-RX goggles (57.8%); 33.2% of the participants wore them regularly, 60.6% were irregular, 6.2% did not wear them. PPE was available for 37.8% of the presentations. The interest of the dosimeter was known to 94.4% of the participants. Apparatus was revised in 19% of cases; 91% of participants received IR training and were qualified to work under radiation. Pictograms existed in 40% of hospitals, light signals in 80%; 58.2% of the presentations knew their meaning.DiscussionThe low availability and irregular wearing of PPE, and the ignorance of hazard indicators are more likely to expose them to IR.ConclusionStrengthen protection measures through the availability of PPE and training

    loading  Loading Related Articles