Abstract
The comparative effectiveness of traditional lead aprons versus newer generation lead-free alternatives in radiation protection is a critical area of investigation in medical safety. While lead aprons have long been the standard, concerns over weight and mobility have spurred interest in lead-free options, which incorporate materials such as antimony, bismuth, and barium sulfate. Understanding the relative performance of these apron types is essential for optimizing radiation protection protocols in medical settings. Relevant studies were identified through electronic database searches, with inclusion criteria focusing on comparative evaluations of apron types in terms of radiation shielding effectiveness and durability. Data extraction and risk of bias were performed to analyze key findings across the selected studies. Analysis of the included eleven studies revealed promising results for lead-free aprons, demonstrating comparable radiation protection to traditional lead aprons. In addition, thinner lead-free aprons were proven to be adequate for shielding while concerns related to weight and mobility. The systematic review highlights the evolving landscape of radiation protection in medical settings, with newer-generation lead-free aprons presenting promising alternatives to traditional lead aprons. In addition, shields composed of combined metals demonstrated more substantial attenuation and dose reduction in comparison to single-metal shields.