Self-reported use of x-ray personal protective equipment by Saskatchewan veterinary workers

Monique N. Mayer Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.

Search for other papers by Monique N. Mayer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS
,
Niels K. Koehncke Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.

Search for other papers by Niels K. Koehncke in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD, MS
,
Amir C. Taherian Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.

Search for other papers by Amir C. Taherian in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BS
, and
Cheryl L. Waldner Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.

Search for other papers by Cheryl L. Waldner in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To describe self-reported use of x-ray personal protective equipment (PPE) by veterinary workers in Saskatchewan, Canada, and to examine factors that affected their use of x-ray PPE.

DESIGN Cross-sectional survey.

SAMPLE 331 veterinary workers.

PROCEDURES A questionnaire was distributed to Saskatchewan veterinary workers electronically and by conventional mail. Recipients were encouraged to share the questionnaire with colleagues. The questionnaire consisted of questions regarding radiation safety practices used during small animal radiographic procedures, including frequency of use of dosimeters and lead aprons, thyroid shields, eyeglasses, and gloves. Respondents were also requested to provide suggestions for increasing use of PPE.

RESULTS 460 questionnaires were completed, of which 331 were returned by workers involved with performing radiographic procedures. Two hundred eighty-five of 331 (86%) respondents reported that at least 1 worker was always in the room during x-ray exposure, and 325 (98%), 291 (88%), and 9 (3%) respondents reported always wearing a lead apron, thyroid shield, and protective eyeglasses, respectively, during radiographic imaging. Two hundred seventeen of 327 (66%) respondents used lead gloves correctly less than half the time. Mean percentage of time that gloves were worn correctly was higher for workers who were required to do so by their employers than for those who were not.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results suggested use of PPE during radiographic procedures can be increased by employers making PPE use mandatory. Other respondent-identified factors that would increase PPE use included the availability of properly fitting and functional PPE and education of workers about health risks associated with ionizing radiation exposure.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To describe self-reported use of x-ray personal protective equipment (PPE) by veterinary workers in Saskatchewan, Canada, and to examine factors that affected their use of x-ray PPE.

DESIGN Cross-sectional survey.

SAMPLE 331 veterinary workers.

PROCEDURES A questionnaire was distributed to Saskatchewan veterinary workers electronically and by conventional mail. Recipients were encouraged to share the questionnaire with colleagues. The questionnaire consisted of questions regarding radiation safety practices used during small animal radiographic procedures, including frequency of use of dosimeters and lead aprons, thyroid shields, eyeglasses, and gloves. Respondents were also requested to provide suggestions for increasing use of PPE.

RESULTS 460 questionnaires were completed, of which 331 were returned by workers involved with performing radiographic procedures. Two hundred eighty-five of 331 (86%) respondents reported that at least 1 worker was always in the room during x-ray exposure, and 325 (98%), 291 (88%), and 9 (3%) respondents reported always wearing a lead apron, thyroid shield, and protective eyeglasses, respectively, during radiographic imaging. Two hundred seventeen of 327 (66%) respondents used lead gloves correctly less than half the time. Mean percentage of time that gloves were worn correctly was higher for workers who were required to do so by their employers than for those who were not.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results suggested use of PPE during radiographic procedures can be increased by employers making PPE use mandatory. Other respondent-identified factors that would increase PPE use included the availability of properly fitting and functional PPE and education of workers about health risks associated with ionizing radiation exposure.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Appendix S1 (PDF 125 kb)

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Mayer (monique.mayer@usask.ca).
  • 1. Sullivan RJ, Keene BE, Sachs M, et al. A survey of x-radiation exposure in the practice of veterinary medicine. Public Health Rep 1957;72:883–887.

  • 2. Wiggins P, Schenker MB, Green R, et al. Prevalence of hazardous exposures in veterinary practice. Am J Ind Med 1989;16:55–66.

  • 3. Shuhaiber S, Einarson A, Radde IC, et al. A prospective-controlled study of pregnant veterinary staff exposed to inhaled anesthetics and x-rays. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2002;15:363–373.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. Epp T, Waldner C. Occupational health hazards in veterinary medicine: physical, psychological, and chemical hazards. Can Vet J 2012;53:151–157.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. Shirangi A, Fritschi L, Holman CD. Prevalence of occupational exposures and protective practices in Australian female veterinarians. Aust Vet J 2007;85:32–38.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Fritschi L, Shirangi A, Robertson ID, et al. Trends in exposure of veterinarians to physical and chemical hazards and use of protection practices. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2008;81:371–378.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. D'Souza E, Barraclough R, Fishwick D, et al. Management of occupational health risks in small-animal veterinary practices. Occup Med (Lond) 2009;59:316–322.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. Hupe O, Ankerhold U. Determination of the dose to persons assisting when x-radiation is used in medicine, dentistry and veterinary medicine. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2011;144:478–481.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Moritz SA, Wilkins JR III, Hueston WD. Evaluation of radiation safety in 29 central Ohio veterinary practices. Am J Public Health 1989;79:895–896.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Widmer WR, Shaw SM, Thrall DE. Effects of low-level exposure to ionizing radiation: current concepts and concerns for veterinary workers. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1996;37:227–239.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11. Environmental Health Directorate Health Protection Branch. Radiation protection in veterinary medicine: recommended safety procedures for installation and use of veterinary x-ray equipment. 1991; safety code 28. Available at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/alt_formats/hecs-sesc/pdf/pubs/radiation/91ehd-dhm151/91ehd-dhm151-eng.pdf. Accessed Dec 22, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12. Publications Saskatchewan. The radiation health and safety regulations, 2005. Available at: www.publications.gov.sk.ca/freelaw/documents/English/Regulations/Regulations/R1–1r2.pdf. Accessed Dec 22, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Publications Saskatchewan. The Saskatchewan Employment Act. Available at: www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/English/Statutes/Statutes/S15–1.pdf. Accessed Dec 22, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. Publications Saskatchewan. The occupational health and safety regulations, 1996. Available at: www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/English/Regulations/Regulations/O1–1R1.pdf. Accessed Dec 22, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Radiation protection in veterinary medicine. Bethesda, Md: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 2004;148.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Public Health Law section 225. Volume A (title 10). Part 16: ionizing radiation. Available at: regs.health.ny.gov/content/part-16-ionizing-radiation. Accessed Dec 22, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17. American College of Veterinary Radiology. ACVR position statement on radiation safety. Available at: www.acvr.org/page/acvr-position-statement-radiation-safety. Accessed Dec 22, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. Sirois M, Anthony E, Mauragis D. Handbook of radiographic positioning for veterinary technicians. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning, 2010;1–5.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. Mauragis D, Berry CR. Small animal thoracic radiography. Todays Vet Pract 2011;1(2):45–50.

  • 20. Mayer MN, Koehncke NK, Belotta AF, et al. Use of personal protective equipment in a radiology room at a veterinary teaching hospital. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2018;59:137–146.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21. Brodbelt DC, Pfeiffer DU, Young LE, et al. Results of the confidential enquiry into perioperative small animal fatalities regarding risk factors for anesthetic-related death in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008;233:1096–1104.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22. Brodbelt DC, Pfeiffer DU, Young LE, et al. Risk factors for anaesthetic-related death in cats: results from the confidential enquiry into perioperative small animal fatalities (CEPSAF). Br J Anaesth 2007;99:617–623.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23. Authors on behalf of ICRP, Stewart FA, Akleyev AV, et al. ICRP publication 118: ICRP statement on tissue reactions and early and late effects of radiation in normal tissues and organs—threshold doses for tissue reactions in a radiation protection context. Ann ICRP 2012;41:1–322.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24. Oh H, Sung S, Lim S, et al. Restrainer exposure to scatter radiation in practical small animal radiography measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters. Vet Med (Praha) 2018;63:81–86.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25. Coughlin SS. Recall bias in epidemiologic studies. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:87–91.

Advertisement