In plain language
In a survey of 77 cardiologists and cardiology residents at one Indian cardiac centre, most reported no formal radiation safety training, fewer than half knew the annual dose limit, and most did not track cumulative exposure. Consultants reported better knowledge than residents.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Cross-sectional survey
- Who was studied
- Interventional cardiologists, Trainees
- Size
- n = 77 respondents (49 residents, 28 consultants)
- Where
- India
- Topics
- Training and educationSafety culture and compliancePersonal protective equipmentDosimetry and monitoringWorkforce and careers
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Most respondents reported no formal radiation safety training.
Key figures: 87%
Fewer than half correctly identified the annual occupational dose limit, and familiarity with the inverse square law was equally low.
Key figures: 46.75%
Over three quarters did not monitor cumulative exposure, and over a third never used lead eyewear.
Key figures: 76.62% did not monitor; 36.36% never used lead eyewear
About half strongly believed radiation exposure affects career longevity.
Key figures: 52%
Consultants showed better knowledge and compliance than residents.
Limits to keep in mind
Single-centre, self-reported questionnaire survey with a small sample (77 respondents) and unreported response rate, limiting generalisability beyond this South Indian tertiary centre.
Related research summaries
- Occupational Health Hazards in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: Results of the 2023 SCAI Survey (2025, Cross-sectional survey)
- Radiation Exposure, Training, and Safety in Cardiology (2024, Narrative review)
- Impact of Radiation Safety Training and Years of Experience on Radiation Safety Practices (medRxiv preprint) (2025, Cross-sectional survey)
- SCAI Multi-Society Position Statement on Occupational Health Hazards (2020, Guideline or consensus statement)
- Radiation Realities: Radiation Safety Practices and Awareness Among Interventional Echocardiographers in the United States (2025, Cross-sectional survey)
How this summary was made
ORSIF prepared this summary with AI assistance from the abstract 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 5, 2026.