Computed tomography (CT) scans involve exposure to ionizing radiation, which can present unavoidable risks. CT is one of the largest contributors to man-made radiation dose in medical populations. Despite the clinical benefits and the increase of CT imaging usage, the concern of arising exposure of ionizing radiation associated with CT imaging may pose significant health risks. This paper investigates the arising exposure of ionizing radiation from CT and associated radiation dose in the study area. The exposure of ionizing radiation from CT scans was assessed in four hospitals using active detection methods. CT scan operators were exposed to an annual effective dose (mean ± SD) ranged from 2.83 ± 0.4 mSv/y to 12 ± 2.4 mSv/y. The public was exposed to annual effective dose ranged from 0.40 ± 0.04 mSv/y to 0.87 ± 0.04 mSv/y. Patients were exposed to minimum effective dose of 1.03 mSv (head scan) and maximum effective dose of 24.45 mSv (abdomen pelvis). The results show the occupational annual effective dose and the public annual effective dose were within the ICRP recommended dose limits. Its first kind of study in this area and the data obtained emphasizes the importance of applying strategies to optimize the radiation dose from CT scans.

Few studies have reviewed the reduction of doses in Computed tomography (CT), while various diagnostic procedures use ionizing radiation to explore the optimal dose estimate using multiple exposure quantities, including milliampere-seconds, kilovoltage peak, and pitch factors while controlling the CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP). Therefore, we considered optimizing CT protocols to reduce radiation and organ doses during head, chest, abdominal, and pelvic CT examinations. For establishing institutional diagnostic reference levels as a benchmark to correlate with national diagnostic reference levels (NDRLs) in KSA conforming to international guidelines for radiation exposure, 3000 adult-patients underwent imaging of organs. Dose parameters were obtained using Monte Carlo software and adjusted using the Siemens Teamplay™ software. CTDIvol, DLP, and effective dose were 40.67 ± 3.8, 757 ± 63.2, and 1.74 ± 0.19, for head; 14.9 ± 1.38, 547 ± 42.9, and 7.27 ± 0.95 for chest; and 16.84 ± 1.45, 658 ± 53.4, and 10.2 ± 0.66 for abdomen/pelvis, respectively. The NDRL post-optimization comparison showed adequate CT exposure. Head CT parameters required additional optimization to match the NDRL. Therefore, calculations were repeated to assess radiation doses. In conclusion, doses could be substantially minimized by selecting parameters per clinical indication of the study, patient size, and examined body region. Additional dose reduction to superficial organs requires a shielding material.

The isotopes of radium, uranium, polonium, lead, and short-lived radon are the common radionuclides found in drinking water. The abnormal amount of radon in drinking water causes health risks. In this study, an attempt has been made to estimate the level of radon concentrations and its annual effective dose from bottled water brands and tap drinking water. A total of 77 samples of drinking water sources; 47 bottled water brands and 27 tap water samples including 3 samples from water storage tank supplier were collected and examined. The measurements were performed using active detection method technique called Durridge RAD7-H₂O with closed loop. The minimum and maximum level of average radon concentrations was 0.10 ± 0.02 BqL⁻¹ and 9.2 ± 0.02 BqL⁻¹. The results were below the limit recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency (11 BqL⁻¹). The annual effective dose for children and adults was in the range from almost 0.51 µSvy⁻¹ to 46.69 µSvy⁻¹. There are no indications of significant threat from radon concentrations in bottled water brands or tap drinking water, and it is safe as far as health hazard is concerned.

Medical ionizing radiation is widely used in hospitals, in particular dental clinics, and in medical research to facilitate the diagnosis and treatment of patients. The awareness, attitude, and perception of ionizing radiation exposure among dental undergraduate students and interns in radiological investigations and dental care clinics were investigated. A cross‐sectional study was conducted; 17 questions were designed online using the software “QuestionPro,” which was licensed to the University of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal. Participants included senior medical dental students from Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University in their third to fifth years, as well as interns from King Fahad University Hospital and private dental care clinics. A total of 855 participants viewed, 360 started the questionnaire, and 258 (72%) completed it online. Overall, knowledge was lacking; 32% of respondents incorrectly believed that magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound used ionizing radiation, while 38% were unsure. Dental X‐rays were deemed harmful by 40% (n = 104) of respondents. According to 33% (n = 85) of participants, there is no radiation scatter during an X‐ray or CT scan, while 30% (n = 76) are unsure. Respondents (44%; n = 104) were unaware of the radiation dose from a chest radiograph and (45%; n = 116) overestimated the radiation dose. The effects of ionizing radiation on healthy tissue are known to more than half of the participants (54%). According to 39% of respondents, digital radiography exposes them to less radiation than traditional radiography. In terms of radiation protection and hazard, 46% said personal monitoring badges should be always worn and 58% (n = 150) said lead aprons should be used on a regular basis. 63% of the subjects had received radiation protection education, such as formal lectures, tutorials, or workshops, while 37% (n = 95) had not. 53% of the respondents were not aware of the international recommendations from the International Commission on Radiological Protection. When asked if they would follow radiation protection protocols if they opened a private dental clinical practice in the future, 50% (n = 129) said they would.

Introduction: Radiation protection for pediatric patients is the main concern in pediatric computed tomography (CT) due to their sensitive organs, such as the brain and the thyroid glands. Accordingly, an optimization of pediatric CT practices is vital to minimize the radiation dose for this population. Aim: To assess the pediatric CT practices of radiologists and technologists in a CT unit. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted among 26 hospitals, located in various regions in Saudi Arabia. A total of 200 hard copies of the questionnaire were distributed manually and were collected for analysis. In total, 117 completed surveys were gathered from technologies, while 49 were gathered from radiologists. Results: In the case of infants with hydrocephalus, 65% of the radiologists ordered an ultrasound (US), 24% ordered a head CT scan, and 10% ordered a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and general X-ray for diagnosis. For pediatric patients complaining of persistent headache, 59% and 27% of the radiologists recommended CT and MRI, respectively, for diagnosis. Conclusion: Most of the radiologists utilize CT head scan to diagnose persistent headache (by 59%) and ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) malfunction (by 41%) in pediatric patients compared with the other modalities. The use of CT can increase the risk of later malignancy among pediatric patients due to radiation exposure. Alternative imaging modalities such as US and MRI (non-ionized radiation) should be considered to reduce the ionizing radiation hazards and optimize the current practices of radiologists. Most of the technologists follow radiation protection protocols in this study as 63% of the technologists used lead apron for pediatric patient’s protection. Radiation awareness training for the technologists could improve the knowledge about the benefits of using lead apron and reduce the radiation risks in pediatric patients.