Awareness of Theatre Team to Radiation Risk From C-Arm During Surgical Procedures: A Case Study of University of Calabar Teaching Hospital in Nigeria

Ndubuisi O. Chiaghanam
{"title":"Awareness of Theatre Team to Radiation Risk From C-Arm During Surgical Procedures: A Case Study of University of Calabar Teaching Hospital in Nigeria","authors":"Ndubuisi O. Chiaghanam","doi":"10.47631/jsrmbs.v3i2.475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study aims to assess the awareness of the theatre team to radiation risk from C-arm as well as their adherence to radiation protection or safety measures in the study Centre. \nMethods: A non-experimental descriptive design was adopted for this study and a well-structured 27 item questionnaire was distributed to 52 members of the surgical theatre: Surgeons, Anesthesiologists, Theatre nurses and Radiographers in the selected hospital. Of this sample, 49 respondents returned their questionnaires. \nResults. Results from this study reveal a high level (83.67%) of knowledge of radiation risk from C-arm. A greater percentage of the respondents have an average level of knowledge of radiation protection or safety measures: Surgeons (58.8%), Anesthesiologists (50%), and Theatre Nurses (33.3%). Of this percentage on awareness, only 41.1% of Surgeons, 30% of Anesthesiologists, 16.6% of theatre Nurses adhere to these radiation protection/safety measures. This study further reveals a low level of awareness and use of radiation monitoring devices: Surgeons (29.4%), Anesthesiologists (10%), and Theatre Nurses (8.3%). Also, the study shows that the surgical team spends long periods during surgical procedures: 4 hours (24.48%), 6 hours (20.4%), 12 hours (6.12%), thus increasing their susceptibility to radiation effects. The study further affirms that a lesser percentage of the respondents (44.89%) knew the safest positioning of the radiation-emitting tube, meaning that a greater percentage of the respondents don’t know the safest position to take during beam-on periods. \nConclusion: This study shows a high level of knowledge of radiation risk, an average level of awareness to radiation protection/safety measures and a poor level adherence of these measures by the theater team.","PeriodicalId":422270,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scientific Research in Medical and Biological Sciences","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scientific Research in Medical and Biological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47631/jsrmbs.v3i2.475","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to assess the awareness of the theatre team to radiation risk from C-arm as well as their adherence to radiation protection or safety measures in the study Centre. Methods: A non-experimental descriptive design was adopted for this study and a well-structured 27 item questionnaire was distributed to 52 members of the surgical theatre: Surgeons, Anesthesiologists, Theatre nurses and Radiographers in the selected hospital. Of this sample, 49 respondents returned their questionnaires. Results. Results from this study reveal a high level (83.67%) of knowledge of radiation risk from C-arm. A greater percentage of the respondents have an average level of knowledge of radiation protection or safety measures: Surgeons (58.8%), Anesthesiologists (50%), and Theatre Nurses (33.3%). Of this percentage on awareness, only 41.1% of Surgeons, 30% of Anesthesiologists, 16.6% of theatre Nurses adhere to these radiation protection/safety measures. This study further reveals a low level of awareness and use of radiation monitoring devices: Surgeons (29.4%), Anesthesiologists (10%), and Theatre Nurses (8.3%). Also, the study shows that the surgical team spends long periods during surgical procedures: 4 hours (24.48%), 6 hours (20.4%), 12 hours (6.12%), thus increasing their susceptibility to radiation effects. The study further affirms that a lesser percentage of the respondents (44.89%) knew the safest positioning of the radiation-emitting tube, meaning that a greater percentage of the respondents don’t know the safest position to take during beam-on periods. Conclusion: This study shows a high level of knowledge of radiation risk, an average level of awareness to radiation protection/safety measures and a poor level adherence of these measures by the theater team.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
手术过程中手术室团队对c型臂辐射风险的认识:以尼日利亚卡拉巴尔大学教学医院为例
目的:本研究旨在评估手术室团队对c型臂辐射风险的认识,以及他们对研究中心辐射防护或安全措施的依从性。方法:本研究采用非实验描述性设计,对选定医院的外科医生、麻醉师、手术室护士和放射技师等52名手术室工作人员进行问卷调查,问卷共27项。在这个样本中,有49名受访者返回了他们的问卷。结果。本研究结果显示,对c型臂辐射风险的认知水平较高(83.67%)。具有辐射防护或安全措施平均知识水平的受访者比例更高:外科医生(58.8%)、麻醉师(50%)和手术室护士(33.3%)。在了解的百分比中,只有41.1%的外科医生、30%的麻醉师和16.6%的手术室护士坚持这些辐射防护/安全措施。这项研究进一步揭示了低水平的认识和使用辐射监测设备:外科医生(29.4%),麻醉师(10%)和手术室护士(8.3%)。此外,研究结果还显示,手术团队在手术过程中花费的时间较长,分别为4小时(24.48%)、6小时(20.4%)、12小时(6.12%),这增加了他们对辐射影响的易感性。该研究进一步证实,较少比例的受访者(44.89%)知道放射线管的最安全位置,这意味着更大比例的受访者不知道在光束照射期间采取的最安全位置。结论:本研究表明,手术室团队对辐射风险的认识水平较高,对辐射防护/安全措施的认识水平一般,对这些措施的遵守程度较差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Role of Sestrin 1 in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Tagraxofusp: Expanding Therapeutic Horizons in Blastic Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cell Neoplasm (BPDCN) Assessment of Mothers' Knowledge about Premature infants with cerebral palsy in the Maternity and Children Hospital in Diwaniyah City Evaluation of some immunological parameters for Staphylococcus xylosus infections in patients with Systemic lupus erythematosus Level of Microbial Contamination of Freshly Prepared Fufu and Retailed Fufu
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1