This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by HART, D Articles by WALL, B F Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by HART, D Articles by WALL, B F

National reference doses for common radiographic, fluoroscopic and dental X-ray examinations in the UK

Radiation Protection Division, Health Protection Agency, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0RQ, UK

Correspondence: D Hart, Radiation Protection Division, Health Protection Agency, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0RQ, UK. E-mail: david.hart{at}hpa.org.uk

The National Patient Dose Database (NPDD) is maintained by the Radiation Protection Division of the Health Protection Agency. The latest review of the database analysed the data collected from 316 hospitals over a 5-year period to the end of 2005. The information supplied amounted to a total of 23 000 entrance surface dose measurements and 57 000 dose–area product measurements for single radiographs, and 208 000 dose–area product measurements along with 187 000 fluoroscopy times for diagnostic examinations or interventional procedures. In addition, patient dose data for dental X-ray examinations were included for the first time in the series of 5-yearly reviews. This article presents a summary of a key output from the NPDD — national reference doses. These are based on the third quartile values of the dose distributions for 30 types of diagnostic X-ray examination and 8 types of interventional procedure on adults, and for 4 types of X-ray examination on children. The reference doses are approximately 16% lower than the corresponding values in the previous (2000) review, and are typically less than half the values of the original UK national reference doses that were derived from a survey in the mid-1980s. This commentary suggests that two of the national reference doses from the 2000 review be retained as diagnostic reference levels because the older sample size was larger than for the 2005 review. No clear evidence could be found for the use of digital imaging equipment having a significant effect on dose.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. L. Miller, D. Kwon, and G. H. Bonavia Reference Levels for Patient Radiation Doses in Interventional Radiology: Proposed Initial Values for U.S. Practice Radiology, September 29, 2009; (2009) radiol.2533090354v1. [Abstract] [Full Text]