Introduction: The use of radiological investigation is an accepted part of medical practice, but there is no known safe radiation dose. Man-made radiation accounts for 13% of the total radiation burden, 90% of it is due to diagnostic medical exposures. The most significant studies of the effects of radiation came from the lifetime study of the approximately 90000 survivors of the atomic bombs dropped over Hiroshima & Nagasaki in 1945. These studies considered survivors who receive whole body doses from photons & neutrons greater than about 0.25 Sv as population liable for excess cancers. These Survivors include people who were 900 to 1500 meters away from the ‘‘hypocenter,’’ just below the exploding bomb. The aim of this study is to make a comparison between the whole body doses of radiation received by the survivors of Hiroshima, Nagasaki & the dose received by patients from the diagnostic radiological examinations in the first day of admission to the ER department. Material and Methods: In the period from 19th October 2008 to 25th November 2008; 273 blunt trauma patients with are vised trauma score of\4 were studied prospectively, in the emergency department of Al Bashir teaching hospital, Amman, Jordan. 188 (68.87%) were males, & 85 (31.13%) were females. Age range was 0.05 to 95 year (mean age 18.06 years). Results: The range of radiological examinations received by the patients was 1–14 (with a mean of 4.63 examination for each patient). radiological examination positive findings were found in 27.83% (76 patient) only, while the findings were negative in 72.17% (197 patient) . The dose of radiation received by the patients ranges between 0.1–18.5 milisivert. With a mean of 3.52 milisivert. 41.76% (114) received [0.25 milisivert, while only 58.24% (159 patient) received\0.25 milisivert. The additional risk for cancer ranges between 0.001–0.731% with a mean of 0.060%. Conclusions: Patients are receiving an unusual high dose of radiation for the diagnostic purposes. This brings an unaccepted additional risk of cancer for the patients
Introduction: The use of radiological investigation is an accepted part of medical practice, but there is no known safe radiation dose. Man-made radiation accounts for 13% of the total radiation burden, 90% of it is due to diagnostic medical exposures. The most significant studies of the effects of radiation came from the lifetime study of the approximately 90000 survivors of the atomic bombs dropped over Hiroshima & Nagasaki in 1945. These studies considered survivors who receive whole body doses from photons & neutrons greater than about 0.25 Sv as population liable for excess cancers. These Survivors include people who were 900 to 1500 meters away from the ‘‘hypocenter,’’ just below the exploding bomb. The aim of this study is to make a comparison between the whole body doses of radiation received by the survivors of Hiroshima, Nagasaki & the dose received by patients from the diagnostic radiological examinations in the first day of admission to the ER department. Material and Methods: In the period from 19th October 2008 to 25th November 2008; 273 blunt trauma patients with are vised trauma score of\4 were studied prospectively, in the emergency department of Al Bashir teaching hospital, Amman, Jordan. 188 (68.87%) were males, & 85 (31.13%) were females. Age range was 0.05 to 95 year (mean age 18.06 years). Results: The range of radiological examinations received by the patients was 1–14 (with a mean of 4.63 examination for each patient). radiological examination positive findings were found in 27.83% (76 patient) only, while the findings were negative in 72.17% (197 patient) . The dose of radiation received by the patients ranges between 0.1–18.5 milisivert. With a mean of 3.52 milisivert. 41.76% (114) received [0.25 milisivert, while only 58.24% (159 patient) received\0.25 milisivert. The additional risk for cancer ranges between 0.001–0.731% with a mean of 0.060%. Conclusions: Patients are receiving an unusual high dose of radiation for the diagnostic purposes. This brings an unaccepted additional risk of cancer for the patients