This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
European Commission. European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic reference levels in thirty-six european countries. Luxembourg; 1996.European CommissionEuropean guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic reference levels in thirty-six european countriesLuxembourg1996Search in Google Scholar
European Union. Diagnostic Reference Levels in Thirty-six European Countries. Part 272. Radiat Prot 2014; 180: 1-73.European Union. Diagnostic Reference Levels in Thirty-six European CountriesPart 272. Radiat Prot2014180173Search in Google Scholar
Mekis N, Zontar D, Skrk D. The effect of breast shielding during lumbar spine radiography. Radiol Oncol 2013; 47: 26-31. 10.2478/raon-2013-0004MekisNZontarDSkrkDThe effect of breast shielding during lumbar spine radiographyRadiol Oncol201347263110.2478/raon-2013-0004Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Mc Entee MF, Kinsella C. The PA projection of the clavicle: a dose-reducing technique. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2010; 139: 539-45. 10.1093/rpd/ncp291McEntee MFKinsellaC.The PA projection of the clavicle: a dose-reducing techniqueRadiat Prot Dosimetry20101395394510.1093/rpd/ncp291Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Mekis N, Mc Entee MF, Stegnar P. PA positioning significantly reduces testicular dose during sacroiliac joint radiography. Radiography 2010; 16: 333-8. 10.1016/j.radi.2010.04.003MekisNMcEntee MFStegnarP.PA positioning significantly reduces testicular dose during sacroiliac joint radiographyRadiography201016333810.1016/j.radi.2010.04.003Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Nic an Ghearr FA, Brennan PC. The PA projection of the abdomen: A dose reducing technique. Radiography 1998; 4: 195-203. 10.1016/S1078-8174(98)80046-1Nic an GhearrFABrennanPC.The PA projection of the abdomen: A dose reducing techniqueRadiography1998419520310.1016/S1078-8174(98)80046-1Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Davey E, England A. AP versus PA positioning in lumbar spine computed radiography: Image quality and individual organ doses. Radiography 2015; 21: 188-96. 10.1016/j.radi.2014.11.003DaveyEEnglandA.AP versus PA positioning in lumbar spine computed radiography: Image quality and individual organ dosesRadiography2015211889610.1016/j.radi.2014.11.003Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Brennan PC, Madigan E. Lumbar spine radiology: Analysis of the posteroanterior projection. Eur Radiol 2000; 10: 1197-201. 10.1007/s003309900272BrennanPCMadiganE.Lumbar spine radiology: Analysis of the posteroanterior projectionEur Radiol200010119720110.1007/s00330990027211003420Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Heriard JB, Terry JA, Arnold AL. Achieving dose reduction in lumbar spine radiography. Radiol Technol 1993; 65: 97-103HeriardJBTerryJAArnoldALAchieving dose reduction in lumbar spine radiographyRadiol Technol19936597103Search in Google Scholar
Ben-Shlomo A, Bartal G, Mosseri M, Avraham B, Leitner Y, Shabat S. Effective dose reduction in spine radiographic imaging by choosing the less radiationsensitive side of the body, Technical Report. The Spine Journal 2016; 16: 558-63. 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.12.012Ben-ShlomoABartalGMosseriMAvrahamBLeitnerYShabatS.Effective dose reduction in spine radiographic imaging by choosing the less radiationsensitive side of the body, Technical ReportThe Spine Journal2016165586310.1016/j.spinee.2015.12.01226704861Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Chaparian A, Kanani A, Baghbanian M. Reduction of radiation risks in patients undergoing some X-ray examinations by using optimal projections: A Monte Carlo program-based mathematical calculation. J Med Psys 2014; 39: 32-9. 10.4103/0971-6203.125500ChaparianAKananiABaghbanianM.Reduction of radiation risks in patients undergoing some X-ray examinations by using optimal projections: A Monte Carlo program-based mathematical calculationJ Med Psys20143932910.4103/0971-6203.125500393122524600170Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Swallow RA, Naylor E, editors. Clark’s positioning in radiography. 11th edition. London: Butterworth Heinemann; 1996. p. 166-70.SwallowRANaylorEeditorsClark’s positioning in radiography11thLondonButterworth Heinemann199616670Search in Google Scholar
Lipovec V, Mekiš N, Starc T. Rentgenske slikovne metode in protokoli. 2. dopolnjena izdaja. Ljubljana: UL, Zdravstvena fakulteta; 2011. p. 253-90.LipovecVMekišNStarcT.Rentgenske slikovne metode in protokolidopolnjena izdaja. Ljubljana: UL, Zdravstvena fakulteta201125390Search in Google Scholar
Frank ED, Long BW, Smith BJ. Merrill’s atlas of radiographic positioning & procedures. 11th edition. St. Louis: Mosby/Elsevier; 2007. p. 371-458.FrankEDLongBWSmithBJ.Merrill’s atlas of radiographic positioning & procedures11thSt. Louis: Mosby/Elsevier2007371458Search in Google Scholar
Farrugia Wismayer E, Zarb F. Radiography of the knee joint: A comparative study of the standing partial flexion PA projection and the standing fully extended AP projection using visual grading characteristics (VGC). Radiography 2016; 22: 152-60. 10.1016/j.radi.2015.10.002Farrugia WismayerEZarbF.Radiography of the knee joint: A comparative study of the standing partial flexion PA projection and the standing fully extended AP projection using visual grading characteristics (VGC)Radiography2016221526010.1016/j.radi.2015.10.002Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Frank ED, Stears JG, Gray JE, Winkler NT, Hoffman AD. Use of the posteroanterior projection: A method of reducing x-raw exposure to specific radiosensitive organs. Radiol Technol 1983; 54: 343-7.FrankEDStearsJGGrayJEWinklerNTHoffmanADUse of the posteroanterior projection: A method of reducing x-raw exposure to specific radiosensitive organsRadiol Technol1983543437Search in Google Scholar
Bontrager KL. Textbook of radiographic positioning and related anatomy. 3rd edition. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book; 1993. p. 241-65.BontragerKL.Textbook of radiographic positioning and related anatomy3rdSt. Louis: Mosby Year Book199324165Search in Google Scholar
Busch HP, Decker MD, Schilz C, Jockenhöfer A, Busch MD, Anschütz M. Image quality and dose management for digital radiography. Qual Assur 2004; p. 24-51.BuschHPDeckerMDSchilzCJockenhöferABuschMDAnschützM.Image quality and dose management for digital radiographyQual Assur20042451Search in Google Scholar
Yanch JC, Behrman RH, Hendricks MJ, McCall JH. Increased radiation dose to overweight and obese patients from radiographic examinations. Radiology 2009; 252: 128-39. 10.1148/radiol.2521080141YanchJCBehrmanRHHendricksMJMcCallJHIncreased radiation dose to overweight and obese patients from radiographic examinationsRadiology20092521283910.1148/radiol.252108014119403846Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Mekis N. Vpliv indeksa telesne mase na obsevanost pacientov pri slikanju medenice. Bilten 2017; 34: 21-4.MekisN.Vpliv indeksa telesne mase na obsevanost pacientov pri slikanju medeniceBilten201734214Search in Google Scholar
Karami V, Zabihzadeh M. Beam Collimation during lumbar spine radiography: a retrospective. J Biomed Phys Eng 2017; 7: 101-6.KaramiVZabihzadehM.Beam Collimation during lumbar spine radiography: a retrospectiveJ Biomed Phys Eng201771016Search in Google Scholar
Tsuno MM, Shu GJ. Posteroanterior versus anteroposterior lumbar spine radiology. J Manip physilogical Ther 1990; 13: 144-151.TsunoMMShuGJ.Posteroanterior versus anteroposterior lumbar spine radiologyJ Manip physilogical Ther199013144151Search in Google Scholar
