Featured Physician
Dr. Hugh McDermott, MD
Interventional Pain · SWIFT Institute
Board-Certified, Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
Anesthesia Pain Fellowship, Emory University
Interventional Pain Physician, SWIFT Institute — 5 years
Medical Advisor, Fortega Medical
2×¹
elevated brain cancer risk for interventional providers
Rajaraman et al., AJR 2016
Rajaraman et al., AJR 2016
4–5 hrs
daily fluoroscopy exposure in Dr. McDermott's practice
The Wake-Up Call
"It's probably just not coincidental."
For Dr. McDermott, the data wasn't abstract. Interventional pain physicians like him spend four to five hours a day working with fluoroscopy — standing close to the beam, positioned exactly where scatter radiation concentrates.
The finding that stopped him wasn't just the elevated cancer risk.¹ It was the pattern: the left side of the brain — the same side clinicians face the screen from, the same side closest to the source.
¹ Rajaraman P, et al. Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206(5):1101–8. NCI cohort of 90,957 technologists; brain cancer mortality HR 2.55 (95% CI 1.48–4.40).
"The one that really made us all shrug and think, okay, there's something here — it's not only that interventional radiology providers are at a higher risk for brain cancer, it's 2x. But it was also the left side of the brain — which is the side when we're standing the way we do, looking at the screen, coming back to the patient. That's getting more of that radiation exposure."
Phantom study: scatter radiation distribution with and without Fortega head & neck protection · ¹Rajaraman et al., AJR 2016
Watch: A Pain Physician's Reality
Pain medicine often means standing close to the beam for hours at a time. Over years of practice, that exposure builds quietly — case by case, day by day.
Exclusive Offer
50% off your first Fortega order.
For physicians and clinicians ready to take their head and neck protection seriously — Dr. McDermott's code gets you started at half the cost.
Your discount code
MCDERMOTT50OFF
Before Fortega
Loosely associated
with his own exposure.
Before working with Fortega, Dr. McDermott describes being — in his own words — "at best loosely associated" with the radiation reaching his head and neck. Not from carelessness. From the limitations of what was available.
The traditional thyroid shield had become a frustration familiar to anyone who has worked in a busy fluoroscopy environment: missing, misaligned, wrong height, and disconnected from the vest it was supposed to attach to.
"Traditional thyroid shield — we go to different facilities, you've got to find one half the time. It may or may not be attached to the lead vest it's supposed to be with. It gets on there, it's hanging down super far anyway, or maybe it's up top and it's not exactly where you want it."
"Something I had never thought of was the angle of the beam and things like that — which you guys have obviously looked into quite a bit. It's all about that scatter profile."
Traditional Approach
Lead thyroid shield
✗ Often missing or detached from lead vest
✗ Wrong position — too high or hanging too low
✗ Head, eyes, and face left unprotected
✗ Lead head pieces: heavy, caused headaches
✗ Prone to cracking — requires regular inspection
✗ Beam angle and scatter profile never addressed
With Fortega
Head & neck textile system
✓ Worn all day — keeps it on between cases
✓ Adjustable fit — pull out slightly, stays in place
✓ Cloth feel — lightweight, no headaches
✓ Flexible textile — no cracking risk
✓ Doesn't interfere with screen or patient view
✓ Targets head and neck scatter pathway
"
This exposure isn't random — it's built into the way we work. If you haven't thought about it at all, you definitely need to. There's a lot of opportunity for people to just take better care of themselves.
— Dr. Hugh McDermott, MD · Interventional Pain · SWIFT Institute
In Dr. McDermott's Words
Why he keeps it on all day.
"What I really like about the product is for the most part I find myself just keeping it on all day because it's just easier. Ergonomically, it's super easy. I don't mind it at all."
"If you find that it's like pushing up against the side of your face or something, it's great because you can just adjust it, pull it out a little bit, and it stays there. No change from an ergonomic standpoint. Doesn't interfere with me when I'm looking at the screen or looking at the patient."
"On the cloth front, that's what it feels like as you're wearing it. It's not nearly as rigid. The technology means you can maneuver it. The concern we always have with leaded vests — it could crack. That's not even an issue with the product Fortega is putting out there. It's super light."
"The biggest reason I didn't do a headpiece with lead before? I sampled a couple of colleagues who'd been taking it seriously and had the lead piece — it was heavy. I got headaches with it. I haven't had that issue at all with the lightweight cloth."
Key Takeaways
Frequent, cumulative exposure — interventional pain physicians absorb radiation from routine fluoroscopy use, case after case
Exposure is not evenly distributed — positioning and beam angle concentrate scatter near the head and neck
Protection must be practical — to be worn consistently in real clinical workflow, it has to be comfortable, lightweight, and adjustable
Exclusive Offer
50% off your first Fortega order.
For physicians and clinicians ready to take their head and neck protection seriously — Dr. McDermott's code gets you started at half the cost.
Your discount code
MCDERMOTT50OFF
The Movement
Physicians taking
their own safety seriously.
Dr. McDermott isn't alone. Across interventional pain, cardiology, spine surgery, and orthopedics — physicians who work in fluoroscopy environments are beginning to look at occupational radiation exposure with the same rigor they apply to patient safety.
The data has always been there. What's changing is the conversation.
Are you a physician working in fluoroscopy?
Join thousands of clinicians who have started the conversation about occupational radiation exposure. Talk to the Fortega team directly.
Contact / Text Us Directly →References
1 Rajaraman P, et al. "Cancer Risks in U.S. Radiologic Technologists Working With Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Procedures, 1994–2008." American Journal of Roentgenology. 2016 May;206(5):1101–8. National Cancer Institute, NIH. Prospective cohort of 90,957 radiologic technologists. Brain cancer mortality HR 2.55 (95% CI 1.48–4.40). PMID: 26998721.
%20(600%20x%20200%20px)%20(1).png?width=600&height=200&name=Untitled%20(1128%20x%20191%20px)%20(600%20x%20200%20px)%20(1).png)