Re-evaluating physical shielding in paediatric chest computed tomography: a phantom-based assessment of dose...

Caregivers may be at risk of exposure to scattered radiation during paediatric chest computed tomography (CT) examinations. This study re-evaluated the effects of physical shielding on paediatric chest CT under controlled experimental conditions using an anthropomorphic paediatric phantom, with an emphasis on the organ dose distribution, scattered radiation relevant to caregivers, and image quality. The phantom was scanned using two CT protocols: with and without bismuth shielding applied to the anterior chest region. Organ doses were measured using real-time scintillation detectors placed in multiple internal organs at the anterior chest surface location corresponding to the breast. Scattered radiation was assessed at caregiver-relevant positions adjacent to the CT gantry using personal dosimeters positioned at the thyroid, eye, abdominal, and gonadal levels. Image quality was evaluated through region-of-interest-based analyses, including the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and Hounsfield unit line profile assessments. The results demonstrated that physical shielding primarily altered the dose distribution in the anterior thoracic regions, including a marked reduction in the breast dose, while doses to the posterior and distant organs were minimally affected. In addition, scattered radiation measurements indicated reduced exposure at caregiver-relevant locations when shielding was applied. Quantitative image analysis showed that shielding-induced changes in the SNR and CNR were measurable but did not compromise the interpretability of the lung parenchyma and other diagnostically relevant regions under controlled conditions. Under these conditions, without automatic exposure control (AEC), physical shielding modified the anterior organ dose distribution and reduced scattered radiation while preserving stable image characteristics. Although the routine clinical use of physical shielding is not advocated, these findings provide quantitative reference data to clarify its potential benefits and limitations in paediatric-specific contexts and support further investigations incorporating AEC and clinical image validation.