National reference doses for common radiographic, fluoroscopic and dental X-ray examinations in the 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 0...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British journal of radiology 2009-01, Vol.82 (973), p.1-12
Main Authors: Hart, D, Hillier, M C, Wall, B F
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Child
Databases, Factual
Fluoroscopy - standards
Humans
Radiation Dosage
Radiation Protection - standards
Radiography - standards
Radiography, Dental - standards
Radiometry - methods
Reference Values
United Kingdom
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary: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.
ISSN:0007-1285
1748-880X
DOI:10.1259/bjr/12568539