OBJECTIVE: To estimate the diagnostic reference levels and effective radiation dose to patients from routine computed tomography (CT) examinations in the province of British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: The patient weight, height and computed tomography dose index or dose linear product (DLP) were recorded on study sheets for 1070 patients who were referred for clinically indicated routine CT examinations at 18 radiology departments in British Columbia. Sixteen of the scanners were multidetector row scanners. RESULTS: The average patient dose varied from hospital to hospital. The largest range was found for CT of the abdomen, for which the dose varied from 3.6 to 26.5 (average 10.1) mSv. For head CT, the range was 1.7 to 4.9 (average 2.8) mSv; for chest CT, it was 3.8 to 26 (average 9.3) mSv; for pelvis CT, it was 3.5 to 15.5 (average 9.0) mSv; and for abdomen-pelvis CT, it was 7.3 to 31.5 (average 16.3) mSv. Reference dose values were calculated for each exam. These DLP values are as follows: head, 1300 mGy cm; chest, 600 mGy cm; abdomen, 920 mGy cm; pelvis, 650 mGy cm; and abdomen-pelvis, 1100 mGy cm. CONCLUSION: Among hospitals, there was considerable variation in the DLP and patient radiation dose for a specific exam. Reference doses and patient doses were higher than those found in similar recent surveys carried out in the United Kingdom and the European Union. Patient doses were similar to those found in a recent survey in Germany.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the diagnostic reference levels and effective radiation dose to patients from routine computed tomography (CT) examinations in the province of British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: The patient weight, height and computed tomography dose index or dose linear product (DLP) were recorded on study sheets for 1070 patients who were referred for clinically indicated routine CT examinations at 18 radiology departments in British Columbia. Sixteen of the scanners were multidetector row scanners. RESULTS: The average patient dose varied from hospital to hospital. The largest range was found for CT of the abdomen, for which the dose varied from 3.6 to 26.5 (average 10.1) mSv. For head CT, the range was 1.7 to 4.9 (average 2.8) mSv; for chest CT, it was 3.8 to 26 (average 9.3) mSv; for pelvis CT, it was 3.5 to 15.5 (average 9.0) mSv; and for abdomen-pelvis CT, it was 7.3 to 31.5 (average 16.3) mSv. Reference dose values were calculated for each exam. These DLP values are as follows: head, 1300 mGy cm; chest, 600 mGy cm; abdomen, 920 mGy cm; pelvis, 650 mGy cm; and abdomen-pelvis, 1100 mGy cm. CONCLUSION: Among hospitals, there was considerable variation in the DLP and patient radiation dose for a specific exam. Reference doses and patient doses were higher than those found in similar recent surveys carried out in the United Kingdom and the European Union. Patient doses were similar to those found in a recent survey in Germany.
Authors: I Pantos; S Thalassinou; S Argentos; N L Kelekis; G Panayiotakis; E P Efstathopoulos Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2011-01-25 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Robert D Prins; Raymond H Thornton; C Ross Schmidtlein; Brian Quinn; Hung Ching; Lawrence T Dauer Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2011-10-17 Impact factor: 1.930