Protection rules application against X-rays in radiology departments of Ouagadougou

In Burkina Faso, the increasing number of departments radiology as well in the public sector as in private setting raises several potential problems of protection against radiation. Objective: This study aimed to raise the insufficiencies on the level of protection against radiation and the consequences that that involves. Material and methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study proceeded in the 17 radiology departments of the town of Ouagadougou. The population under investigation consisted of the staff of the departments (heads of department and DATR staff). Results: On the whole these departments had 32 rooms of radiology and 39 imaging devices. Of note, 89.7% of these imaging devices were functional. The staff consisted of 81.6% of workers directly assigned to work under radiation (DATR) including 17.3% radiologists. Men represented 87.5% of this staff. 29.4% of the departments had leaded gonade protections, as much little skirts, 41.2% had material of passive immobilization. 85.7% of the development rooms presented armored walls, 47.6% of the walls and openings were light-proof and 47.6% of the rooms were equipped with inactinic lamps. 23.5% of the services had an apron, 64.7% had two, 11.8% of them had six aprons. 41.2% of the departments did not have leaded gloves, 82.3% did not have thyroid protection devices and 94.1% did not have leaded glasses. Hundred percent of the departments had leaded folding screens including 92.3% of normal size and 61.5% were at normal distance from X-ray emitting tube. Forty-seven percent of the departments practiced the individual dosimetric monitoring for workers DATR and 16% monitoring for not workers DATR. Three rooms of radiology benefited from a dosimetric monitoring of environment and three departments practiced the dosimetric monitoring in supervised zone. The medical examination at recruiting time and the periodic medical visits were not practiced in any department. Only one department had a qualified person dedicated in protection against radiation, two departments only had benefited from a control since their creation and three departments practiced the preventive maintenance of the radiologic devices. In matter of signaling: 25% of the rooms had signal warning the use of X-rays, 50% warning the controlled zone and none warning a supervised zone. 21.9% of the rooms had a luminous witness of powering of the generator. 40.6% of the rooms had walls and openings armored and as much of room had a normal surface. All the rooms were air-conditioned. Conclusion: These failures are due to an incomplete regulation and also to the absence of an organization of control and a lack of culture of safety. © 2010 Elsevier Masson SAS.