Current Status of Radiation Dose Levels in Conventional Pediatric Radiography: A Review Study

DOI: 10.4236/ojrad.2015.52016   PDF   HTML   XML   3,871 Downloads   4,951 Views   Citations


Artificial sources of radiation account for approximately 14% of the annual radiation dose from all sources of radiation. Because of the increased lifetime risk per unit dose for children, radiographic procedures could lead to increase the radiogenic risk of cancer. This study intended to review the pediatric doses in planar radiography procedures and to assess different methods used to reduce the radiation dose for pediatric patients. Studies addressing pediatric dose optimization were identified from a search of the internet scientific databases. The search in literature was limited to journal articles that were written in English. The findings of the study illustrate that there are many available methods of dose reduction are available. The application of dose reduction methods will reduce the dose up to 75% of its current value. Training of staff is the cornerstone of patient dose optimization in pediatric radiology.

Share and Cite:

Sulieman, A. (2015) Current Status of Radiation Dose Levels in Conventional Pediatric Radiography: A Review Study. Open Journal of Radiology, 5, 104-110. doi: 10.4236/ojrad.2015.52016.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (2008) Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation, UNSCEAR 2008 Report: Volume I: Sources—Report to the General Assembly Scientific Annexes A and B.
[2] Paterson, A., Frush, P.D. and Donnelly, L (2001) Helical CT of the Body: Are Settings Adjusted for Pediatric Patients? American Journal of Roentgenology, 176, 297-301.
[3] International Commission of Radiological Protection (1991) 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission of Radiological Protection. ICRP 60. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
[4] Sulieman, A., Theodorou, K., Vlychou, M., Kanavou, D., Fezoulidis, I. and Kappas, C. (2007) Radiation Dose Measurement and Risk Estimation for Paediatric Patients Undergoing Micturating Cystourethrography. The British Journal of Radiology, 80, 731-737.
[5] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (1989) Exposure of U.S. Population from Diagnostic Medical Radiation. NCRP Report No. 100, Bethesda.
[6] European Commission (1996) Quality Criteria for Diagnostic Radiographic Images in Paediatrics. Report EUR 16261, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1-35.
[7] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (2009) Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States. NCRP Report No. 160, Bethesda.
[8] Food and Drug Administration. Pediatric Dose Reduction Efforts.
[9] Sulieman, A., Vlychou, M., Tsougos, I. and Theodorou, K. (2011) Radiation Doses to Paediatric Patients and Comforters Undergoing Chest X-Rays. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 147, 171-175.
[10] Martin, L., Ruddlesden, R., Makepeace, C., Robinson, L., Mistry, T. and Starritt, H. (2013) Paediatric X-Ray Radia Tion Dose Reduction and Image Quality Analysis. Journal of Radiological Protection, 33, 621-633.
[11] Lateef, T.M., Grewal, M., McClintock, W., Chamberlain, J., Kaulas, H. and Nelson, K.B. (2009) Headache in Young Children in the Emergency Department: Use of Computed Tomography. Pediatrics, 124, e12-e17.
[12] Alzen, G. and Benz-Bohm, G. (2011) Radiation Protection in Pediatric Radiology. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 108, 407-414.
[13] National Research Council Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (2006) Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. National Academy of Sciences, National Academies Press, Washington DC.
[14] International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) (2005) Patient Dosimetry for X Rays Used in Medical Imaging, ICRU Report 74, Volume 5, No. 2, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[15] International Commission of Radiological Protection (2007) Recommendations of the International Commission of Radiological Protection. ICRP 103, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
[16] National Radiological Protecton Board (2002) Radiation Exposure of the UK Population from Medical and Dental X-Ray Examinations. NRPB-W4, Chilton.
[17] Sulieman, A., Barakat, H., Zailae, A., Abuderman, A. and Theodorou, K. (2015) Measurement of Patient Radiation Doses in Certain Urography Procedures. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, in Press.
[18] Frantzen, M., Robben, M., Postma, A., Zoetelief, J., Wildberger, J. and Kemerink, G. (2012) Gonad Shielding in Paediatric Pelvic Radiography: Disadvantages Prevail over Benefit. Insights into Imaging, 3, 23-32.
[19] International Commission on Radiological Protection (1982) Protection of the Patient in Diagnostic Radiology (ICRP Publication 34). Annals of the ICRP, 9, 18-23.
[20] Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 21 CFR 1000.50 (1976) Recommendation for the Use of Specific Area Gonad Shielding on Patients during Medical Diagnostic X-Ray Procedures.
[21] Lee, C.I., Haims, A.H., Monico, E.P., Brink, J.A. and Forman, H.P. (2004) Diagnostic CT Scans: Assessment of Patient, Physician, and Radiologist Awareness of Radiation Dose and Possible Risks. Radiology, 231, 393-398.
[22] Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII (2006) Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation Phase 1. National Academies Press, Washington DC.
[23] Brenner, D.J. and Hall, E.J. (2007) Computed Tomography—An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure. New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 2277-2284.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.