Literature DB >> 23718618

On the (f)utility of measuring the lead equivalence of protective garments.

A Kyle Jones1, Louis K Wagner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Protective garments incorporating lead (Pb) or other moderate to high atomic number elements are a necessary radiation protection tool. However, as lead has been replaced by other elements, verifying manufacturers' claims regarding the lead equivalence of such garments has become nearly impossible, and current standards only require measurement of attenuation or lead equivalence at a single beam quality. A garment may provide a high degree of protection at the specified beam quality, but underperform at others. The authors sought to measure the lead equivalence of several protective garments and propose a better method for quantifying the protective value of garments.
METHODS: The authors measured the penetration of primary and scattered radiation through lead sheets and three protective garments of nominal 0.5 mm Pb equivalence, one lead and two lead-free. Penetration was measured using beams of nominal 60, 80, 100, and 120 kVp. Primary penetration through protective garments at 70 kVp was also measured. A lead-lined enclosure was constructed for measuring scatter penetration, as instruments must be protected from stray radiation when measuring low-level penetration of scattered radiation. Using polynomial least-squares fits to the measured data of penetration through lead sheets, the authors determined the lead equivalence of the protective garments across a range of beam qualities.
RESULTS: The lead garment was 0.5 mm Pb equivalent across all beam qualities evaluated. While the maximum lead equivalence of the lead-free garments did occur at the manufacturer-specified beam quality, neither garment was 0.5 mm Pb equivalent at the specified beam quality. The lead equivalence of the lead-free garments was a strong function of beam quality and nature of the radiation, i.e., primary or scattered. The lead equivalence of the lead-free garments in primary beams ranged from 0.40 to 0.47 mm Pb equivalent and in scattered beams ranged from 0.37 to 0.46 mm Pb equivalent. The penetration through one lead-free garment at 60 kVp was 478% higher than the penetration through the lead garment. The authors have also provided linear fits of radiation penetration through lead as a function of half-value layer. It is likely that assessment of protective value can be performed using primary beams matched to the spectra of scattered beams. The authors propose the diagnostic radiation index of protection (DRIP), a weighted sum of the percentage of radiation penetration across a range of beam qualities, as a more robust method for specifying the protective value of garments.
CONCLUSIONS: The protective value of garments from both primary and scattered radiation is a strong function of beam quality. Assessment of the protective value should be performed across a range of beam qualities. Methods for performing such assessment must be developed and must specify beam qualities, measurement geometry, and the appropriate weighting across the beam quality range for different applications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23718618      PMCID: PMC3965340          DOI: 10.1118/1.4805098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  15 in total

1.  Evaluation of the transmitted exposure through lead equivalent aprons used in a radiology department, including the contribution from backscatter.

Authors:  Emmanuel G Christodoulou; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Sandra C Larson; Katie L Darner; Jahangir Satti; Heang-Ping Chan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  The relationship between back pain and lead apron use in radiologists.

Authors:  B Moore; E vanSonnenberg; G Casola; R A Novelline
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Protective aprons in imaging departments: manufacturer stated lead equivalence values require validation.

Authors:  M Finnerty; P C Brennan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-03-24       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  [Is the lead-equivalent suited for rating protection properties of lead-free radiation protective clothing?].

Authors:  H Eder; W Panzer; H Schöfer
Journal:  Rofo       Date:  2005-03

5.  Occupational hazards of interventional cardiologists: prevalence of orthopedic health problems in contemporary practice.

Authors:  James A Goldstein; Stephen Balter; Michael Cowley; John Hodgson; Lloyd W Klein
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Addendum to 'Composite materials for x-ray protection'.

Authors:  E W Webster
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 1.316

7.  Emission of fluorescent x-radiation from non-lead based shielding materials of protective clothing: a radiobiological problem?

Authors:  E Schmid; W Panzer; H Schlattl; H Eder
Journal:  J Radiol Prot       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 1.394

8.  Attenuation properties of lead composite aprons.

Authors:  P H Murphy; Y Wu; S A Glaze
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Lightweight aprons for protection against scattered radiation during fluoroscopy.

Authors:  T E Hubbert; J J Vucich; M R Armstrong
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Prevalence of spinal disc disease among interventional cardiologists.

Authors:  A M Ross; J Segal; D Borenstein; E Jenkins; S Cho
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1997-01-01       Impact factor: 2.778

View more
  4 in total

1.  Lead Free Multilayered Polymer Composites for Radiation Shielding.

Authors:  Laurynas Gilys; Egidijus Griškonis; Paulius Griškevičius; Diana Adlienė
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 4.967

2.  Evaluation and verification of a simplified lead equivalency measurement method.

Authors:  Richard Ryan Wargo; Areej Fawzi Aljabal; Pei-Jan Paul Lin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Evaluation of lead equivalence of radiation protection apparatuses as a function of tube potential and spectral shaping filter.

Authors:  Areej Fawzi Aljabal; Richard Ryan Wargo; Pei-Jan Paul Lin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Efficiency of lead aprons in blocking radiation - how protective are they?

Authors:  Seung-Jae Hyun; Ki-Jeong Kim; Tae-Ahn Jahng; Hyun-Jib Kim
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2016-05-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.