Background: Nurses are vital in the management of patients for diagnostic imaging examinations. Some nurses work in radiology departments and others assist radiographers during mobile and theatre radiography. In recent years, some nurses working in the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland are referring patients for radiological examinations, a role which was traditionally that of medical doctors. This work involves ionising Radiation which is harmful to the human body. Therefore, it is essential that nurses understand the measures needed to protect patients, members of the public and themselves from ionising Radiation. The aim of this study was to systematically review the awareness of nurses to Radiation protection in medicine. Method: This systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature search was conducted in January 2020 in three databases: ScienceDirect, PubMed/MEDLINE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), as well as hand searching of journals and internet. Data were extracted from all included research studies and analysed thematically. Results: Ten primary research studies were identified, selected and included in this systematic review. Six themes were identified following data synthesis and analysis: sources of ionising Radiation, benefits of ionising Radiation in medicine, biological effects of ionising Radiation to the human body, principles of Radiation protection, control measures for external Radiation exposure, populations most vulnerable to ionising Radiation, and education and training in Radiation protection. In general, this review found that nurses are not adequately aware of Radiation protection. Conclusion: There is a need to integrate Radiation protection into the nursing curriculum and to provide Continuing Professional Development (CPD) to nurses.

Background: In recent decades many guidelines has been conducted by Radiation protection organizations about Radiation protection in dentistry. This study aimed to evaluate the observance of these guidelines in educational clinics of all dental schools in Iran. Material and Methods: In this cross-sectional study a self-administered questionnaire, based on National Radiation protection Board (NRPB) and European Commission guidelines, was conducted. The radiology departments of all dental school (18 schools) were surveyed in this study. The questionnaire was consisted of 3 sections including intraoral radiography, extraoral radiography and implementation of quality control programs. Results: In the case of the existence of Radiation protection facilities (such as lead apron, thyroid shield and lead impacted walls) the use of high speed films and existence of automatic processor in dental schools, there was a proper condition. The main problem was related to lack of regular quality control and quality assurance programs. Digital radiography systems were employed in none of the schools and it was occasionally used for research purposes at some of them. Conclusions: This study has emphasized on the need for further consideration of Radiation protection principles in dental schools, especially on the field of quality control and quality assurance programs.