Objectives: Multiple studies show orthopedic health problems for medical staff due to wearing radiation protection aprons. The aim of this study was to evaluate the weight pressure on the shoulder as a marker of physical strain caused by different radiation-protection devices. Methods: For the weight pressure measurement, a pressure sensor (OMD-30-SE-100N, OptoForce, Budapest, Hungary) placed on the left and right shoulder was used. Wearing different radiation protection systems the force measurement system was used to quantify the weight pressure. Measurements were acquired in still standing position and during various movements. Results: A mean significant decreasing weight pressure on the shoulder between 74% and 84% (p<0.001) was measured, when the free-hanging radiation protection system was used in comparison to one-piece and two-piece radiation protection aprons and coats. Using two-piece radiation protection aprons, the weight pressure was significantly lower than that of one-piece radiation protection coats. If a belt was used for the one-piece radiation protection coat, the weight pressure on the shoulder was reduced by 32.5% (p = 0.003). For a two-piece radiation protection apron and a one-piece radiation protection coat (with and without belt) a significant different weight pressure distribution between the right and left shoulder could be measured. Conclusions: The free-hanging radiation protection system showed a significant lower weight pressure in comparison to the other radiation protection devices. Apart from this, use of a two-piece radiation protection apron or addition of a belt to a radiation protection coat proved to be further effective options to reduce weight pressure.

Purpose: Several studies report occupational orthopedic problems among interventional cardiologists. These health problems are usually multifactorial. However, the personal protective equipment used should play a major role. An online survey was conducted to determine the frequency of such health problems among interventional radiologists and to correlate them with the use of personal radiation protective clothing. Material and Methods: An anonymous online survey that comprised of 17 questions was sent via e-mail to 1427 members of the German Society for Interventional Radiology (DeGIR) in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The questions were focused on interventional workload, the use of personal radiation protection apparel and orthopedic problems. Given the different scale levels, the associations between the variables were analyzed using different statistical methods. A significance level of p < 0.05 was chosen. Results: There were 221 survey responders (15.5 % response rate). About half of responders (47.7 %) suffered from more than five episodes of orthopedic problems during their interventional career. Lumbar spine was involved in 81.7 % of these cases, cervical spine in 32.8 %, shoulder in 28.5 % and knee in 24.7 %. Because of orthopedic problems, 16.1 % of the responders had to reduce and 2.7 % had to stop their interventional practice. The number of affected body regions correlates with the fit of the radiation protection means (p < 0.05, r = 0.135) and the reduction of activity as an interventional radiologist (p < 0.05, r = -0.148). Conclusion: Overall, the survey reveals widespread orthopedic problems at several body regions among interventional radiologists, associated with the fit of radiation protection systems, among other factors. A connection between the orthopaedic complaints and the radiation protection system used could not be established.