-
The British Journal of Radiology Oct 2021
Topics: History, 19th Century; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Patient-Centered Care; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 34545765
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20219004 -
Cardiovascular and Interventional... Jun 2021
Topics: Humans; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiography, Interventional
PubMed: 33733685
DOI: 10.1007/s00270-021-02816-2 -
Radiation Protection Dosimetry Nov 2017Exposure to naturally occurring radon is unavoidable and is second only to smoking as a direct cause of lung cancer in the USA. The literature for existing information... (Review)
Review
Exposure to naturally occurring radon is unavoidable and is second only to smoking as a direct cause of lung cancer in the USA. The literature for existing information on US occupations that are prone to increased radon exposures was reviewed. Current recommendations and applicable protective standards against occupational radon exposure that are applicable to US workers are discussed. Exposure varied widely among several working populations, most of whom were employed in industries that were unrelated to the uranium fuel cycle. Radon protection standards differed among agencies and have not changed since the height of domestic uranium production in the 1970s. In contrast, European countries are adopting recommendations by the International Commission on Radiation Protection to set a reference level near a derived annual exposure of about one working level month, which is 25% of the level currently established for US miners.
Topics: Humans; Occupational Exposure; Radiation Protection; Radon; United States
PubMed: 28204795
DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncx007 -
RoFo : Fortschritte Auf Dem Gebiete Der... Jun 2019The increasing number of minimally invasive fluoroscopy-guided interventions is likely to result in higher radiation exposure for interventional radiologists and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The increasing number of minimally invasive fluoroscopy-guided interventions is likely to result in higher radiation exposure for interventional radiologists and medical staff. Not only the number of procedures but also the complexity of these procedures and therefore the exposure time as well are growing. There are various radiation protection means for protecting medical staff against scatter radiation. This article will provide an overview of the different protection devices, their efficacy in terms of radiation protection and the corresponding dosimetry.
METHOD
The following key words were used to search the literature: radiation protection, eye lens dose, radiation exposure in interventional radiology, cataract, cancer risk, dosimetry in interventional radiology, radiation dosimetry.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Optimal radiation protection always requires a combination of different radiation protection devices. Radiation protection and monitoring of the head and neck, especially of the eye lenses, is not yet sufficiently accepted and further development is needed in this field. To reduce the risk of cataract, new protection glasses with an integrated dosimeter are to be introduced in clinical routine practice.
KEY POINTS
· A combination of personal radiation protection devices and optimized dosimetry improves the safety of medical staff..
CITATION FORMAT
· König AM, Etzel R, Thomas RP et al. Personal Radiation Protection and Corresponding Dosimetry in Interventional Radiology: An Overview and Future Developments. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2019; 191: 512 - 521.
Topics: Fluoroscopy; Forecasting; Germany; Humans; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Protection; Radiology, Interventional; Radiometry; Scattering, Radiation
PubMed: 30703826
DOI: 10.1055/a-0800-0113 -
The British Journal of Radiology Aug 2020Within a few months of discovery, X-rays were being used worldwide for diagnosis and within a year or two for therapy. It became clear very quickly that while there were... (Review)
Review
Within a few months of discovery, X-rays were being used worldwide for diagnosis and within a year or two for therapy. It became clear very quickly that while there were immense benefits, there were significant associated hazards, not only for the patients, but also for the operators of the equipment. Simple radiation protection measures were implemented within a decade or two and radiation protection for physicians and other operators has continued to evolve over the last century driven by cycles of widening uses, new technologies, realization of previously unidentified effects, development of recommendations and regulations, along with the rise of related societies and professional organizations. Today, the continue acceleration of medical radiation uses in diagnostic imaging and in therapeutic modalities not imagined at the turn of this century, such as positron emission tomography, calls for constant vigilance and flexibility to provide adequate protection for the growing numbers of medical radiation workers.
Topics: Health Personnel; History, 19th Century; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 32496817
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20200282 -
The British Journal of Radiology 2016The aim of this article was to explore the evidence for the revised European Union basic safety standard (BSS) radiation dose limits to the lens of the eye, in the... (Review)
Review
The aim of this article was to explore the evidence for the revised European Union basic safety standard (BSS) radiation dose limits to the lens of the eye, in the context of medical occupational radiation exposures. Publications in the open literature have been reviewed in order to draw conclusions on the exposure profiles and doses received by medical radiation workers and to bring together the limited evidence for cataract development in medical occupationally exposed populations. The current status of relevant radiation-protection and monitoring practices and procedures is also considered. In conclusion, medical radiation workers do receive high doses in some circumstances, and thus working practices will be impacted by the new BSS. However, there is strong evidence to suggest that compliance with the new lower dose limits will be possible, although education and training of staff alongside effective use of personal protective equipment will be paramount. A number of suggested actions are given with the aim of assisting medical and associated radiation-protection professionals in understanding the requirements.
Topics: Health Personnel; Humans; Lens, Crystalline; Occupational Diseases; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 26828972
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20151034 -
Radiation dose and radiation protection for patients and physicians during interventional procedure.Journal of Radiation Research 2010Although the wide acceptance of interventional radiology (IVR) procedures has led to increasing numbers of interventions being performed, the radiation doses from IVR... (Review)
Review
Although the wide acceptance of interventional radiology (IVR) procedures has led to increasing numbers of interventions being performed, the radiation doses from IVR are higher. Increasing numbers of case reports of patient radiation injury resulting from IVR are being published. Therefore, radiation protection during IVR poses a very important problem. To protect against radiation injury, the evaluation of radiation dose is essential. The radiation dose must be evaluated for each IVR x-ray machine and each laboratory, because it varies greatly. To obtain this information easily, and to ensure practical use of the radiation information, good relationships between interventionists and medical physicists are essential.
Topics: Algorithms; Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary; Catheter Ablation; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; Humans; Patients; Physicians; Protective Clothing; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Protection; Radiodermatitis; Radiology, Interventional; Radiometry; Scattering, Radiation
PubMed: 20339253
DOI: 10.1269/jrr.09112 -
Technology in Cancer Research &... Dec 2016All procedures involving ionizing radiation, whether diagnostic or therapeutic, are subject to strict regulation, and public concerns have been raised about even the low... (Review)
Review
All procedures involving ionizing radiation, whether diagnostic or therapeutic, are subject to strict regulation, and public concerns have been raised about even the low levels of radiation exposures involved in diagnostic imaging. During the last 2 decades, there are signs of more balanced attitude to ionizing radiation hazards, as opposed to the historical "radiophobia." The linear no-threshold hypothesis, based on the assumption that every radiation dose increment constitutes increased cancer risk for humans, is increasingly debated. In particular, the recent memorandum of the International Commission on Radiological Protection admits that the linear no-threshold hypothesis predictions at low doses (that International Commission on Radiological Protection itself has used and continues to use) are "speculative, unproven, undetectable, and 'phantom'." Moreover, numerous experimental, ecological, and epidemiological studies suggest that low doses of ionizing radiation may actually be beneficial to human health. Although these advances in scientific understanding have not yet yielded significant changes in radiation regulation and policy, we are hopeful such changes may happen in the relatively near future. This article reviews the present status of the low-dose radiation hazard debate and outlines potential opportunities in the field of low-dose radiation therapy.
Topics: Carcinogenesis; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; Humans; Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiation, Ionizing; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 26391015
DOI: 10.1177/1533034615605639 -
RoFo : Fortschritte Auf Dem Gebiete Der... Sep 2019
Topics: Guideline Adherence; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 31430783
DOI: 10.1055/a-0943-1526 -
NTM Jun 2022After WWII, global concerns about the uses of nuclear energy and radiation sources in agriculture, medicine, and industry brought about calls for radiation protection....
After WWII, global concerns about the uses of nuclear energy and radiation sources in agriculture, medicine, and industry brought about calls for radiation protection. At the beginning of the 1960s radiation protection involved the identification and measurement of all sources of radiation to which a population was exposed, and the evaluation and assessment of populations in terms of the biological hazard their exposure posed. Mexico was not an exception to this international trend. This paper goes back to the origins of the first studies on the effects of radiation and on radioprotective compounds in the Genetics and Radiobiology Program of the National Commission of Nuclear Energy founded in 1960, at a time when the effects of radiation on living beings and radiation protection demanded the attention of highly localized groups of scientists and the creation of international as well as national institutions, and its connection to dosimetry and radiation protection until the 1990s. This historical reconstruction examines the circulation of knowledge, scientists, and their material and cognitive resources, to show that radiobiology, with dosimetry and radiation protection as cases in point, not only were carried out with high international standards in parallel with international agencies, but also reflected local material needs, including the standardization of new experimental techniques.
Topics: History, 20th Century; International Agencies; Mexico; Nuclear Energy; Radiation Protection; Radiobiology
PubMed: 35536307
DOI: 10.1007/s00048-022-00331-0