PurposeMany orthopedic procedures, particularly minimally invasive surgeries that require fluoroscopic imaging, present a radiation exposure risk to the orthopedic surgeon. Surgeons may have a higher risk of developing cancer if they receive significant amounts of radiation. Using personal protective equipment (PPE) and appropriate imaging device positioning, plays an important role in reducing the surgeon’s radiation exposure. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the surgeon’s radiation safety awareness and practices. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the practices and radiation protection knowledge of orthopedic surgeons in the operating theater.ApproachA nationwide survey was conducted from October 2021 to January 2022 to evaluate the radiation protection practices and awareness of orthopedic surgeons in Jordan. Normalized practice and knowledge scores were evaluated through the survey and compared between different groups. Descriptive statistics were used to present the surgeon’s practices and radiation protection knowledge. Student’s t-test was used to compare the outcomes between surgeons that received radiation protection training and surgeons who did not. Using ANOVA analysis, we compared the score outcomes for all the other variables.ResultsThe surgeons that received radiation protection training had significantly higher practice score 39.6% compared with 31% for the group that did not have training (p = 0.01). No statistically significant difference in the knowledge scores was found between the two groups. Although 91% of the surgeons reported using some kind of PPE, only 5.5% used a dosimeter badge during surgeries.ConclusionThere is an obvious deficit in radiation safety training of orthopedic surgeons.
KEYWORDS: Digital breast tomosynthesis, Mammography, Breast cancer, Digital mammography, Cancer, Breast, Diagnostics, Tomography, New and emerging technologies, Medicine
The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of adding digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to digital mammography (DM) on sensitivity and specificity scores for readers with different DM and DBT experience compared with that of DM alone. Ethical committee approval was obtained. 41 DM and DBT cases (22 cancer, 19 normal), each containing two views, were reviewed by 18 readers, divided into groups according to level of experience with DBT and DM. Readers were asked to report each case in two modes (DM and DM+DBT) using a 5-point scale (1- Normal, 2- Benign, 3- Equivocal, 4-Suspicious, 5- Malignant). The radiologists’ diagnostic performance was compared between DM and DM + DBT and evaluated by sensitivity and specificity. Readers with no DBT workshop showed higher sensitivity using DM+DBT compared with DM (P-value 0.03). Female readers, readers with less than 5 years of DM experience, readers with more than 20 mammography reads per week, readers who are not using DBT in clinical practice, readers with mammography fellowship, and readers who had a DBT workshop showed a significantly higher specificity using DM+DBT in comparison to DM alone (P-values 0.01, 0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.03, 0.03, 0.01 respectively). The current study showed that the addition of DBT to DM might not significantly change the readers performance in terms sensitivity, however it may result in less number of recalls to additional examinations which provides a substantial benefit in the screening and diagnostic settings.
Access to the requested content is limited to institutions that have purchased or subscribe to SPIE eBooks.
You are receiving this notice because your organization may not have SPIE eBooks access.*
*Shibboleth/Open Athens users─please
sign in
to access your institution's subscriptions.
To obtain this item, you may purchase the complete book in print or electronic format on
SPIE.org.
INSTITUTIONAL Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.
PERSONAL Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.