Dataset Information

Association between occupational testicular radiation exposure and lower male sex ratio of offspring among orthopedic surgeons.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Exposure to occupational radiation can lower the male sex ratio. However, specific radiation exposure to the testes has not been evaluated.

Objective

This study aimed to examine the association between testicular radiation exposure and lower male sex ratio in children.

Methods

A comprehensive questionnaire survey was administered to 62 full-time male doctors with children aged < 10 years at 5 hospitals. Based on the possibility of testicular radiation exposure 1 year before the child's birth, participants were assigned to 3 groups as follows: RT (orthopedic surgery), RNT (cardiology/neurosurgery), and N (others). Intergroup differences in the proportion of female children were ascertained, and the female sex ratio (number of female/total number) of each group was compared against the standard value of 0.486. Multivariate logistic regression analysis with a generalized estimating equation was used to model the effects on the probability of female birth while controlling for the correlation among the same fathers.

Results

The study population included 62 fathers and 109 children, 49 were female: 19/27, 11/30, and 19/52 in the RT, RNT, and N group, respectively; the RT group had the highest proportion of females (p = 0.009). The p values for comparisons with the standard sex ratio (0.486) were 0.02, 0.19, and 0.08 for the RT, RNT, and N groups, respectively. Based on the N group, the adjusted odds ratios for the child to be female were 4.40 (95% confidence interval 1.60-2.48) and 1.03 (0.40-2.61) for the RT and RNT groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Our results imply an association between testicular radiation exposure and low male sex ratio of offspring. Confirmatory evidence is needed from larger studies which measure the pre-conceptional doses accumulated in various temporal periods, separating out spermatogonial and spermatid effects.

SUBMITTER: Hijikata Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8719764 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBoth occupational physicians and orthopedic surgeons can be involved in the management of work relevant musculoskeletal disorders. These physicians hardly communicate with each other and this might lead to different advice to the patient. Therefore, we evaluated a standardized information exchange form for the exchange of relevant information between the orthopedic surgeon and the occupational physician. The main goals of this qualitative study are to evaluate whether the form improved information exchange, whether the form gave relevant information, and to generate ideas to further improve this information exchange.MethodsThe information exchange form was developed in two consensus meetings with five orthopedic surgeons and five occupational physicians. To evaluate the information exchange form, a qualitative evaluation was set up. Structured telephone interviews were undertaken with the patients, interviews with the physicians were face-to-face and semi-structured, based on a topic list. These interviews were recorded and literally transcribed. Each interview was analyzed separately in Atlas-Ti.ResultsThe form was used for 8 patients, 7 patients agreed to participate in the qualitative evaluation. All three orthopedic surgeons involved and three of the six involved occupational physicians agreed to be interviewed. The form was transferred to 4 occupational physicians, the other 3 patients recovered before they visited the occupational physician. The information on the form was regarded to be useful. All orthopedic surgeons agreed that the occupational physician should take the initiative. Most physicians felt that the form should not be filled out for each patient visiting an orthopedic surgeon, but only for those patients who do not recover as expected. Orthopedic surgeons suggested that a copy of the medical information provided to the general practitioner could also be provided to occupational physicians.ConclusionThe information exchange form was regarded to be useful and could be used in practice. The occupational physician should take the initiative for using this form and most physicians felt the information should only be exchanged for patients who do not recover as expected. That means that the advantage of giving information early in the treatment is lost.

Project description:Background:The use of fluoroscopically-guided interventional (FGI) procedures by orthopedic surgeons has been increasing. This study aimed to investigate the occupational radiation exposure among orthopedic surgeons in South Korea. Methods:A nationwide survey of orthopedic surgeons was conducted in South Korea in October 2017. The dosimetry data of the participants were obtained from the National Dosimetry Registry. The orthopedic surgeons were categorized by job specialty [spine or trauma specialists, other orthopedic specialists, and residents], and descriptive statistics for the demographics and work-related characteristics were presented. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the risk factors for the orthopedic surgeons who were not linked with the dosimetry data. Results:Among the total participants (n?=?513), 40.5% of the orthopedic surgeons spent more than 50% of their time working with the FGI procedures when compared with their overall work. The average frequency of the FGI procedures among the orthopedic surgeons was 12.3?days per month. Less than 30% of the participants were regularly provided with radiation monitoring badges. The proportion of subjects who always wore lead aprons and thyroid shields were 52 and 29%, respectively. The residents group experienced more unfavorable working conditions of radiation exposure than the other specialists. The dosimetry data were not significantly linked among the residents (odds ratio [OR] 2.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-3.95) and orthopedic surgeons working at small hospitals (OR 4.76, 95% CI 1.05-21.51). Conclusions:Although orthopedic surgeons often performed FGI procedures, they wore protective gear less frequently, and a large proportion of orthopedic surgeons were not monitored by the national radiation dosimetry system. As the number of radiation procedures performed by the orthopedic surgeons increases, more intensive approaches are needed to reduce radiation exposure, especially for spine and trauma surgeons.