Abstract
Recent concern over the amount of ionizing radiation to which the public is exposed raises the question of the safety and utility of the fluoroscope in the general practitioner's office. There is evidence that the amount of exposure during fluoroscopy varies widely, as does the output of the fluoroscopes actually found in use. The busy practitioner does not always take time for his eyes to achieve maximal dark adaptation, and optimal filtration and other safety precautions have often been neglected. Fluroscopy is most valuable in observing abnormal movements. It therefore supplements the data obtained from roentgenography, which is otherwise more precise, yields permanent records, and gives more diagnostic information in proportion to the amount of radiation involved.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
