Back to the list
Congress: ECR25
Poster Number: ESI-14841
Type: EuroSafe Imaging Poster
DOI: 10.26044/ecr2025/ESI-14841
Authorblock: R. W. Loose1, E. Vaño2, J. Ammon1, J. S. Andersson3, H. Brat4, B. Brkljačić5, K. Caikovska6, R. Corridori7, J. Damilakis8; 1Nürnberg/DE, 2Madrid/ES, 3Umeå/SE, 4Tournai/BE, 5Zagreb/HR, 6Riga/LV, 7Bruxelles/BE, 8Iraklion/GR
Disclosures:
Reinhard W.R. Loose: Nothing to disclose
Eliseo Vaño: Nothing to disclose
Josefin Ammon: Nothing to disclose
Jonas Seth Andersson: Nothing to disclose
Hugues Brat: Nothing to disclose
Boris Brkljačić: Nothing to disclose
Katrina Caikovska: Nothing to disclose
Riccardo Corridori: Nothing to disclose
John Damilakis: Nothing to disclose
Keywords: Radioprotection / Radiation dose, CT, PACS, RIS, Dosimetry, Physics, Radiation safety, Quality assurance
Purpose or learning objective DMS systems are an essential tool for optimizing radiation protection of patients. They help to evaluate dosimetric parameters of different modalities, monitor compliance with diagnostic reference levels (DRL) and detect unintentional overexposures [1, 2, 3, 4].  In addition, they help fulfil the requirements of Directive 2013/59/EURATOM regarding the electronic transmission of dosimetric data and the detection of unintended patient exposures. Through an EuroSafe questionnaire sent to a random selection of five ESR members per country (244) as well as to...
Read more Methods or background The EuroSafe Imaging Clinical Dosimetry and Dose Management Working Group (WG) launched a questionnaire on the use of DMS in European member states and analysed the results in terms of modalities, frequency of radiological procedures, involvement of medical physics experts (MPEs), legal requirements, and local issues (support by information technology (IT), modality interfaces, protocol mapping, clinical workflow, and associated costs). The questionnaire was coordinated in the WG with regard to the number and details of the questions and was created...
Read more Results or findings The responses from 26 different countries showed significant differences. 62% of the responses from DMS users came from Western Europe, 38% from Eastern Europe (Fig. 1). For IS facilities, 51% of the responses came from MPEs and 26% from radiologists. For Non Imaging Stars facilities (NIS), 16% of the responses came from MPEs and 72% from radiologists, showing that IS have higher availability and involvement of MPEs. DMS users reported examination frequencies ranging from 100,000 to over 300,000 per year,...
Read more Conclusion Despite the great advantages of dose management systems for optimising radiation protection, distribution remains insufficient. This questionnaire shows that reasons include: a lack of DICOM interfaces, insufficient harmonisation of procedure names (main problem), lack of medical physicist and IT support, and costs. The results of the questionnaire have been published [5]. With the results of an IAEA publications and questionnaire on technical aspects of DMS systems [6, 7], the next step of the WG will be to provide concrete recommendations...
Read more References [1] Vano E, Frija G, Stiller W et. al. (2020) European Society of Radiology (ESR). Harmonisation of imaging dosimetry in clinical practice: practical approaches and guidance from the ESR EuroSafe Imaging initiative. Insights Imaging 11:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00859-6[2] Vano E, Frija G, Loose R et. al. (2021) Dosimetric quantities and effective dose in medical imaging: a summary for medical doctors. Insights Imaging 12:99. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01041-2[3] Vano E, Loose R, Frija G et. al. (2022) Notifications and alerts in patient dose values for computed...
Read more
GALLERY