Article

Assessment of occupational radiation exposure among various medical professions in interventional cardiology: A five-year study (2018–2022)

¹ Ministry of Health, Riyadh, 11176, Saudi Arabia
² Department of Diagnostic Radiography Technology, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Jazan University, Jazan, 45142, Saudi Arabia
³ Department of Physics and Astronomy, College of Science, P.O. BOX 2455, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11451, Saudi Arabia

^* Corresponding author: nshubayr@jazanu.edu.sa

Received: 9 August 2024
Accepted: 31 January 2025

Abstract

Occupational radiation exposure in medical settings is a growing concern, especially in interventional cardiology. This study aims to assess the occupational radiation exposure among medical personnel in interventional cardiology from 2018 to 2022. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the annual mean effective doses (AMED) and the average over a five-year period (MED-5y) among various medical professionals, including anesthesiologists, cardiologists, nurses, radiologists, and radiologic technologists. The effective doses were estimated using thermoluminescent dosimeters and analyzed to compute the AMED and MED-5y. Statistical significance was determined using T-tests and ANOVA, with subsequent Tukey Post-Hoc Tests for specific group comparisons. The AMED varied significantly among professions, with cardiologists experiencing the highest exposure (3.469 ± 7.81 mSv in 2022). An overall increase in AMED doses was observed from 2018 to 2022. The results of the T-Test showed a significant difference in the radiation exposure across the years under study (p < .001). The MED-5y were anesthesiologists (0.62 ± 0.30), cardiologists (3.23 ± 7.37), nurses (1.17 ± 0.56), radiologic technologists (1.13 ± 0.38), and radiologists (0.86 ± 0.26). The study also found significant differences in MED-5y across professions (F = 14.8, p < .001). Gender-based analysis indicated significant differences in MED-5y, particularly among nurses and radiologists. The results of this study revealed that the annual effective dose received by anesthesiologists, cardiologists, nurses, radiologists, and radiologic technologists was below the recommended occupational dose limits, as stipulated by both national and international standards.