In plain language
In one English hospital survey, staff who regularly wore lead aprons reported back pain about twice as often as non-users (63% vs 32%). Many lacked radiation protection training, and a small education session improved apron knowledge.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Cross-sectional survey
- Who was studied
- Mixed lab staff, Other surgeons, Radiologic technologists, Nurses, Interventional cardiologists
- Size
- n = 121 staff (59 lead apron users, 62 controls)
- Where
- United Kingdom
- Topics
- Musculoskeletal injury and ergonomicsPersonal protective equipmentTraining and educationSafety culture and complianceThyroid
- Summary based on
- the full text
What it found
Back pain was about twice as prevalent among regular lead apron users as among staff who did not wear aprons.
Key figures: 63% (SG) vs 32% (CG)
Most apron users with back pain attributed it to lead aprons, versus fewer controls attributing it to work.
Key figures: 83% vs 37%
Among apron users without prior back pain, nearly half developed new back pain since wearing aprons; some missed work or considered changing careers.
Key figures: 46%; 3 missed work; 3 considered career change
Back pain prevalence was not associated with weekly hours of apron use.
Key figures: 35% (0-5 h), 33% (5-10 h), 26% (10-20 h)
Knowledge gaps were common: many had no radiation induction, and most did not wear thyroid shields, mostly because they were unavailable; education improved apron knowledge.
Key figures: 56% no induction; 65% no thyroid shield; unaware of lead vs lead-free fell from 35% to 7.7%
Limits to keep in mind
Single-hospital, self-reported questionnaire with unmatched groups (control group mostly female) and no adjustment for confounders; the education evaluation included only 13 staff and measured knowledge, not pain outcomes.
Related research summaries
- SCAI Multi-Society Position Statement on Occupational Health Hazards (2020, Guideline or consensus statement)
- AST Standards for Ionizing Radiation Exposure (Guideline or consensus statement)
- Increasing Awareness and Reducing Occupational Hazards in the Cardiac Catheterization and Electrophysiology Laboratories: Working to Eliminate Lead and Complications of Radiation in Cardiovascular Team Study (2026, Cross-sectional survey)
- Radiation exposure in interventional cardiology: a narrative review of health effects and novel approaches to ensure radiation safety (2025, Narrative review)
- Occupational Radiological Protection in Interventional Procedures, ICRP PUBLICATION 139 (2018, Guideline or consensus statement)
How this summary was made
ORSIF prepared this summary with AI assistance from the full text of the paper. A program then checked that the passage supporting each finding appears word for word in that source. A person has not yet reviewed each summary, so read the original before relying on a number. ORSIF summarizes research and does not endorse any product or company. Report a problem with this summary.
Prepared November 3, 2026.