| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2019 | Volume
: 26
| Issue : 2 | Page : 90-93 |
|
|
Determination of X-ray shielding thickness in two tertiary hospitals in Kano metropolis, Nigeria
Aminu Abubakar Abubakar1, Mohammed Sidi2
1 Department of Radiology, Hajia Gambo Sawaba General Hospital, Bayero University, Kano, Kaduna State, Nigeria
2 Department of Radiology, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria
Correspondence Address:
Mr. Mohammed Sidi
Department of Radiology, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Bayero University, Kano
Nigeria
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/wajr.wajr_28_18
|
|
|
Background: Radiation dose depends on the total workload (Wtot) which is affected by the number of patients, tube potential, and tube current. Despite the increment in patients visiting the X-ray units under study and X-ray tube revolutions, changes have not been made in the shielding material to suit the current situation.
Aims: This study aims to evaluate the thickness of X-ray shielding barriers in two tertiary hospitals in Kano Metropolis using XRAYBAR software.
Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study and was undertaken from March 2017 to October 2017. A purposive sampling technique was employed to select two hospitals out of five. The two were named A and B, respectively. The minimum required thickness in each barrier was determined by XRAYBAR software.
Results: The Wtot (workload) for room I, II and III was found to be 199.9, 146, and 149.1 mA-min per week. The shielding barrier thickness required to reduce the unshielded radiation dose to the design dose limit for wall 1, 2, 3, 4, and operating console of the Room I was found to be 17.5, 5.5, 0.2, 0.00, 3.3 cm, that of wall 1, 2, 3, and 4 of room II was found to be 9.1, 3.4, 0.02, 2.3 cm, while for the wall 1, 2, 3, 4, and operating console of room III was found to be 12.3, 4.8, 3.8, 3.2, and 26.5 cm, respectively.
Conclusion: The calculated shielding barrier thickness from XRAYBARR code when compared to the design barrier thickness was found to be adequate.
|
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
