| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3867082 | The Journal of Urology | 2012 | 5 Pages |
PurposeA questionnaire was administered to urologists to evaluate attitudes and behaviors about protection from radiation exposure during fluoroscopy guided endourological procedures.Materials and MethodsThe questionnaire was e-mailed to 1,482 urologists, including urology residents, specialists and urologists holding all levels of academic degrees, between May and June 2011. The questionnaire administered to study participants was composed of demographic questions, and questions on radiation exposure frequency, and the use of dosimeters and flexible protective clothes. If a respondent reported not using dosimeters or protective clothes, additional questions asked for the reason.ResultsOf the 1,482 questionnaires 394 (26.58%) were returned, of which 363 had completed answers. A total of 307 physicians (84.58%) were exposed to ionizing radiation, of whom 79.61% stated that they perform percutaneous nephrolithotomy at the clinic. Fluoroscopy guidance was the initial choice of 96.19% of urologists during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Despite the common use of lead aprons (75.24%) most urologists did not use dosimeters (73.94%), eyeglasses (76.95%) or gloves (66.67%) while 46.44% always used thyroid shields during fluoroscopy. When asked why they did not use protective clothing, the most common answers were that protective clothes are not ergonomic and not practical.ConclusionsResults clearly highlight the lack of use of ionizing radiation protection devices and dosimeters during commonly performed fluoroscopy guided endourological procedures among urologists in Turkey.
