Contact Shielding in Radiology
Updates and Evidence-Based Recommendations
Keywords:
Radiological Protection, Contact Protection, Gonadal Protection, Radiology, Scoping Review, Professional Development, Radiation Protection, Contact Protection, Gonadal Protection, Scoping Review, Professional DevelopmentAbstract
For years, the use of contact shields in radiological examinations was considered effective in reducing the radiation dose to sensitive organs. However, recent scientific evidence shows limited benefits and that they may even compromise image quality, leading to repeat examinations and an increase in the total dose received by the patient.
The methodology used in this study was a scoping review, based on the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute, outlining the available literature on the recommendation to discontinue this practice. The search was conducted in the MEDLINE database using specific keywords, covering a ten-year period and studies in Portuguese and English, with free access. Of the 16,072 articles initially identified, only 9 met all the inclusion criteria.
In Portugal, the absence of updated guidelines results in inconsistent practices between institutions and professionals, making it urgent to review standards and train radiology technicians to adequately communicate this change to patients.
References
The British Institute of Radiology. Guidance on using shielding on patients for diagnostic radiology applications. 2020;(March):1–87. Available from: www.bir.org.uk
AAPM. PS 8-A AAPM Position Statement on the Use of Patient Gonadal and Fetal Shielding. [Internet]. 2019. [cited 2025 Apr 27]. Available from: https://www.aapm.org/org/policies/details.asp?type=PP&id=2552
McKenney S, Gingold E, Zaidi H. Gonadal shielding should be discontinued for most diagnostic imaging exams. Med Phys. 2019;46(3):1111–4
ICRP. ICRP PUBLICATION 103 The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiat Phys Chem [Internet]. 2007;188(24):1–337. Available from: www.mdpi.com/journal/diagnostics%0Ahttp://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1609_web.pdf%5Cnhttp://www.vomfi.univ.kiev.ua/assets/files/IAEA/Pub1462_web.pdf%0Ahttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16168243
Hiles P, Gilligan P, Damilakis J, Briers E, Candela-Juan C, Faj D, et al. European consensus on patient contact shielding. Phys Medica [Internet]. 2022;96(December 2021):198–203. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.12.006
Hiles P. Contemporary issues in radiation protection in medical imaging special feature: Editorial. Br J Radiol. 2021;94(1126):4–6.
Samara ET, Saltybaeva N, Sans Merce M, Gianolini S, Ith M. Systematic literature review on the benefit of patient protection shielding during medical X-ray imaging: Towards a discontinuation of the current practice. Phys Medica [Internet]. 2022;94(September 2021):102-9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.12.016
American Association of physicists in medicine. Patient Gonadal and Fetal Shielding in Diagnostic Imaging Frequently Asked Questions. Am Assoc Phys Med [Internet]. 2019;3. Available from: https://www.aapm.org/org/policies/documents/CARES_FAQs_Patient_Shielding.pdf
DGS-Direção Geral de Saúde. Entrada em vigor do Decreto-Lei no 108/2018. Lisboa; 2018.
PRESIDÊNCIA DO CONSELHO DE MINISTROS. Decreto-Lei n.o 108/2018. Diário da República [Internet]. 2018 Apr 26;n.o 232(1.a série):5490–543. Available from: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rda/article/view/8346
União Europeia. Legislação 17 janeiro de 2014. J Of da União Eur. 2014;
PRESIDÊNCIA DO CONSELHO DE MINISTROS. Decreto-Lei n. 139-D/2023. Diário da República. 2023;n.o 250(1.a série):342(23)-342(53).
Entidade Reguladora da Saúde. Protecção Radiológica passa para competência da ERS [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Apr 29]. Available from: https://www.ers.pt/pt/comunicacao/destaques/lista-de-destaques/proteccao-radiologica-passa-para-competencia-da-ers/
The Joanna Briggs Institute. Joana Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual: 2015 edition/Suplement [Internet]. Adelaide; 2015 [cited 2019 Feb 18]. Available from: www.joannabriggs.org
Candela-Juan C, Ciraj-Bjelac O, Sans Merce M, Dabin J, Faj D, Gallagher A, et al. Use of out-of-field contact shielding on patients in medical imaging: A review of current guidelines, recommendations and legislative documents. Phys Medica. 2021;86(March):44–56.
Hiles P. Using patient shielding – What is the risk? Br J Radiol. 2021;94.
Marsh RM, Silosky M. Patient shielding in diagnostic imaging: Discontinuing a legacy practice. Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212(4):755–7.
Jeukens CRLPN, Kütterer G, Kicken PJ, Frantzen MJ, van Engelshoven JMA, Wildberger JE, et al. Gonad shielding in pelvic radiography: modern optimised X-ray systems might allow its discontinuation. Insights Imaging. 2020;11(1):1–11.
Thakur Y, Schofield SC, Bjarnason TA, Patlas MN. Discontinuing Gonadal and Fetal Shielding in X-Ray. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2021;72(4):595–6.
Kosik RO, Quek ST, Kan E, Aoki S, Yang CH, Pongnapang N, et al. APQS consensus regarding patient shielding during routine radiographic imaging. Br J Radiol. 2021;94(1123):2–4
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ana Sofia Coelho, Aura Lopes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
