@article{article_364193, title={Personnel radiation dose assessment using a novel dosimeter in the department of radiology and dentistry in a medical facility in Delta State, South-South Nigeria: Our experience in the last 4 years}, journal={The European Research Journal}, volume={4}, pages={70–78}, year={2018}, DOI={10.18621/eurj.364193}, url={https://izlik.org/JA49AN37AS}, author={Omojola, Akintayo Daniel and Akpochafor, Michael Onoride and Adeneye, Samuel Olaolu and Aniekop, Ukeme Pius and Anizor, Margaret Idongesit and Ekpo, Mary-Ann Etim and Madu, Chibuzor Bede}, keywords={Direct ion storage dosimeter,ion-chamber,panoramic,cephalometric,workload}, abstract={<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:200%;"> <b> <i> <span lang="de" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="de">Objectives. </span> </i> </b> <b> <i> <span lang="de" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="de"> </span> </i> </b> <span lang="de" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="de">Large percentages
of X-ray facilities in Nigeria do not use radiation monitoring device; a few
percentage that use them do not evaluate or carryout out assessment programs to
ascertain the detriment to occupationally exposed workers. This study was aimed
at evaluating dose reports from 2013 to 2016 for personnel who operate  radiation facilities and those that work
within radiation field during certain X-ray procedures/examinations in the
department of radiology and dentistry respectively; to ascertain if there is
correlation between personnel dose and workload in both department and to
determine if dose records are within acceptable limit recommended by the
international atomic energy agency (IAEA) safety series. <b> <i>Methods </i> </b> <i>. </i> Direct ion storage (DIS) dosimeter was
used for a total of 35 occupationally exposed personnel who work in the
department of radiology and dentistry. The DIS dosimeter was read every two
months and results were authomatically saved on the instadose <sup>TM </sup>
platform. <b> <i>Results </i> </b>. The mean (total) dose in radiology department for the
first, second, third and fourth year was 0.17 ± 0.08 (3.52) mSv, 0.08 ± 0.03
(0.77) mSv, 0.07 ± 0.04 (0.72) mSv and 0.07 ± 0.05 (0.55) mSv and in Dentistry
was 0.08 ± 0.02 (0.73) mSv, 0.05 ± 0.02 (0.42) mSv, 0.05 ± 0.02 (0.24) mSv and
0.07 ± 0.04 (0.34) mSv; respectively. There was significant difference in mean
personnel dose from 2013-2016 in Radiology ( <i>p </i>= 0.028) and in Dentistry Department ( <i>p </i>= 0.004). </span> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">Correlation of workload and personnel dose in
Radiology ( <i>p </i>= 0.240) and Dentistry
Department ( <i>p </i>= 0.765) wasn’t
significant </span> <span lang="de" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="de">. There was no
correlation in mean dose between both department ( <i>p </i>= 0.256). <b> <i>Conclusion </i> </b>. Overall mean dose in
both department for occupationally exposed personnel were </span> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">
below IAEA annual dose limit of 20 mSv averaged over a period of 5
consecutive years </span> <span lang="de" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="de">. Dose reports of
personnel in both department reduced as the year progressed due to radiation
safety awareness. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p>}, number={2}