Skip Navigation


Radiation Protection Dosimetry Advance Access originally published online on October 30, 2008
Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2008 132(3):334-338; doi:10.1093/rpd/ncn284
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
132/3/334    most recent
ncn284v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Liu, H.
Right arrow Articles by Li, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Liu, H.
Right arrow Articles by Li, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Patient doses in different projections of conventional diagnostic X-ray examinations

Haikuan Liu, Weihai Zhuo*, Bo Chen, Yanling Yi and Dehong Li

Institute of Radiation Medicine, Fudan University, 2094 Xietu Road, Shanghai 200032, People's Republic of China

* Corresponding author: whzhuo{at}fudan.edu.cn

Received June 10, 2008, amended August 25, 2008, accepted October 5, 2008

The entrance surface doses (ESDs) of six commonly performed diagnostic X-ray projections were surveyed in four public hospitals, and an experimental formula was derived for estimating the ESD from the exposure parameters of different projections. In-phantom measurements of the organ doses were also performed for the six projections, and the effective doses were evaluated using different sets of tissue weighting factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). For the chest radiograph, compared with the low tube potential technique, lower ESD was observed in the high tube potential technique; however, no significant difference of effective doses was found between the two techniques. Except for the pelvis radiography, the effective doses of five other projections evaluated with the tissue weighting factors (wT) recommended by ICRP publication 103 were generally higher than those evaluated with the factors recommended by ICRP publication 60.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.