-
Environment International Aug 2021Many radiation protection actions carry a multitude of direct and indirect consequences that can impact on the welfare of affected populations. Health surveillance...
Many radiation protection actions carry a multitude of direct and indirect consequences that can impact on the welfare of affected populations. Health surveillance raises ethical challenges linked to privacy and data protection, as well as questions about the net benefit of screening. The SHAMISEN project recognized these issues and developed specific recommendations to highlight ethical challenges. Following a brief overview of ethical issues related to accident management, this paper presents the SHAMISEN recommendations: R1 The fundamental ethical principle of doing more good than harm should be central to accident management; and R4 Ensure that health surveillance respects the autonomy and dignity of affected populations, and is sensitive to any inequity in the distribution of risks and impacts. While a holistic approach to accident management means that decisions will be complicated by different values, perceptions and uncertainties about outcomes, addressing ethical issues could help ensure that the assumptions and potential conflicts behind eventual decisions are as transparent as possible.
Topics: Fukushima Nuclear Accident; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 33823460
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106537 -
Physica Medica : PM : An International... Aug 2022Fluoroscopy guided interventional procedures guarantee high benefits for patients, but are associated with high levels of radiation exposure for the medical staff. Their...
PURPOSE
Fluoroscopy guided interventional procedures guarantee high benefits for patients, but are associated with high levels of radiation exposure for the medical staff. Their increasing use and complexity results in even higher radiation exposures, with a risk to exceed the annual dose limit of 20 mSv for the eye lens. The aim of the study was to evaluate the potential dose reduction of eye lens exposure for lead glasses and for two types of visors (half and full), used by physicians performing interventional procedures.
METHODS
Eye lens dose measurements were carried out on an anthropomorphic phantom simulating a physician performing a fluoroscopy guided interventional procedure. Dose reduction factors were calculated using high sensitivity thermoluminescent dosimeters. Moreover, a spatial dose distribution was generated for the two visors.
RESULTS
The dose reduction coefficient was found to be 1.6 for the glasses, 1.2 for the half visor and 4.5 for the full visor.
CONCLUSIONS
Optimal radiation protection requires a combination of different radiation protection equipment. Full visors that cover all the face of the operator are recommended, as they absorb scattered radiation reaching the eyes from all directions. Full visors should be prioritized over radiation protection glasses for cases where other protective equipment such as ceiling shielding cannot be used.
Topics: Drug Tapering; Fluoroscopy; Humans; Lens, Crystalline; Occupational Exposure; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Exposure; Radiation Protection; Radiology, Interventional
PubMed: 35809498
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.06.021 -
Life Sciences in Space Research May 2024The risk posed by prolonged exposure to space radiation represents a significant obstacle to long-duration human space exploration. Of the ion species present in the...
The risk posed by prolonged exposure to space radiation represents a significant obstacle to long-duration human space exploration. Of the ion species present in the galactic cosmic ray spectrum, relativistic protons are the most abundant and as such are a relevant point of interest with regard to the radiation protection of space crews involved in future long-term missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. This work compared the shielding effectiveness of a number of standard and composite materials relevant to the design and development of future spacecraft or planetary surface habitats. Absorbed dose was measured using AlO:C optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters behind shielding targets of varying composition and depth using the 1 GeV nominal energy proton beam available at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York. Absorbed dose scored from computer simulations performed using the multi-purpose Monte Carlo radiation transport code FLUKA agrees well with measurements obtained via the shielding experiments. All shielding materials tested and modeled in this study were unable to reduce absorbed dose below that measured by the (unshielded) front detector, even after depths as large as 30 g/cm. These results could be noteworthy given the broad range of proton energies present in the galactic cosmic ray spectrum, and the potential health and safety hazard such space radiation could represent to future human space exploration.
Topics: Radiation Protection; Protons; Humans; Cosmic Radiation; Space Flight; Monte Carlo Method; Radiation Dosage; Spacecraft; Computer Simulation
PubMed: 38670638
DOI: 10.1016/j.lssr.2024.02.005 -
International Journal of Radiation... 2022The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) is coordinating an expansive epidemiologic effort entitled the Million Person Study of Low-Dose...
Cohort profile - MSK radiation workers: a feasibility study to establish a deceased worker sub-cohort as part of a multicenter medical radiation worker component in the million person study of low-dose radiation health effects.
BACKGROUND
The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) is coordinating an expansive epidemiologic effort entitled the Million Person Study of Low-Dose Radiation Health Effects (MPS). Medical workers constitute the largest occupational radiation-exposed group whose doses are typically received gradually over time.
METHODS
A unique opportunity exists to establish an Institutional Review Board/Privacy Board (IRB/PB) approved, retrospective feasibility sub-cohort of diseased Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) medical radiation workers to reconstruct occupational/work history, estimate organ-specific radiation absorbed doses, and review existing publicly available records for mortality from cancer (including leukemia) and other diseases. Special emphasis will be placed on dose reconstruction approaches as a means to provide valid organ dose estimates that are as accurate and precise as possible based on the available data, and to allow proper evaluation of accompanying uncertainties. Such a study that includes validated dose measurements and information on radiation exposure conditions would significantly reduce dose uncertainties and provided greatly improved information on chronic low-dose risks.
RESULTS
The feasibility sub-cohort will include deceased radiation workers from MSK who worked during the nearly seventy-year timeframe from 1946 through 2010 and were provided individual personal radiation dosimetry monitors. A feasibility assessment focused on obtaining records for about 25-30,000 workers, with over 124,000 annual doses, including personnel/work histories, specific dosimetry data, and appropriate information for epidemiologic mortality tracing will be conducted. MSK radiation dosimetry measurements have followed stringent protocols complying with strict worker protection standards in order to provide accurate dose information for radiation workers that include detailed records of work practices (including specific task exposure conditions, radiation type, energy, geometry, personal protective equipment usage, badge position, and missed doses), as well as recorded measurements. These dose measurements have been ascertained through a variety of techniques that have evolved over the years, from film badges to thermoluminescent dosimetry technology to optically stimulated luminescent methodologies. It is expected that individual total doses for the sub-cohort will have a broad range from <10 mSv to > =1000 mSv.
CONCLUSIONS
MSK has pioneered the use of novel radiation diagnostic and therapeutic approaches over time (including initial work with x-rays, radium, and radon), with workplace safety in mind, resulting in a variety of radiation worker exposure scenarios. The results of this feasibility sub-cohort of deceased radiation workers, and associated lessons learned may potentially be applied to an expanded multicenter study of about 170,000 medical radiation worker component of the MPS.
Topics: Feasibility Studies; Humans; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiometry; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 30810447
DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2019.1587194 -
Journal of Radiation Research Dec 2002The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) has recently published a report (Report #137) that discusses various aspects of the concepts used in... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) has recently published a report (Report #137) that discusses various aspects of the concepts used in radiation protection and the difficulties in measuring the radiation environment in spacecraft for the estimation of radiation risk to space travelers. Two novel dosimetric methodologies, fluence-based and microdosimetric event-based methods, are discussed and evaluated, along with the more conventional quality factor/LET method. It was concluded that for the present, any reason to switch to a new methodology is not compelling. It is suggested that because of certain drawbacks in the presently-used conventional method, these alternative methodologies should be kept in mind. As new data become available and dosimetric techniques become more refined, the question should be revisited and that in the future, significant improvement might be realized. In addition, such concepts as equivalent dose and organ dose equivalent are discussed and various problems regarding the measurement/estimation of these quantities are presented.
Topics: Cosmic Radiation; Extraterrestrial Environment; Humans; Radiation Protection; Radiometry
PubMed: 12793742
DOI: 10.1269/jrr.43.s113 -
The British Journal of Radiology Oct 2021The practice of placing radiation protective shielding on patients ('in contact') in order to reduce the dose to certain radiosensitive organs for diagnostic X-ray...
The practice of placing radiation protective shielding on patients ('in contact') in order to reduce the dose to certain radiosensitive organs for diagnostic X-ray examination, has been employed for decades. However, there has been a growing body of evidence that this practice is often ineffective or even counterproductive and the use of such shielding can also overemphasise the hazards of ionising radiation in the public mind. This has led to a growing disparity in the application of patient contact shielding and culminated in several professional bodies issuing guidance and statements to provide a consistent approach to patient contact shielding. This, in turn, has led to a healthy discussion and re-evaluation of when and why patient contact shielding should be used, where the main issue centres around the criteria used to arrive at the recommendations. The decision process involves considering, among others, the reported effectiveness of the shielding and a subjective assessment of the subsequent risks from their use. In order to improve the transparency of these recommendations, it is therefore suggested that a threshold for dose and/or risk should be clearly stated, below which no protection is required. A suggested starting point for defining this threshold is discussed. This would enhance uniformity of application and provide clarity for staff, patients and the public. It would also ensure that any future research in this area could be easily incorporated into the general guidance.
Topics: Decision Making; Humans; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiation, Ionizing; Radiography; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34347543
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210701 -
Update on the biological effects of ionizing radiation, relative dose factors and radiation hygiene.Australian Dental Journal Mar 2012Diagnostic imaging is an indispensable part of contemporary medical and dental practice. Over the last few decades there has been a dramatic increase in the use of... (Review)
Review
Diagnostic imaging is an indispensable part of contemporary medical and dental practice. Over the last few decades there has been a dramatic increase in the use of ionizing radiation for diagnostic imaging. The carcinogenic effects of high-dose exposure are well known. Does diagnostic radiation rarely cause cancer? We don't know but we should act as if it does. Accordingly, dentists should select patients wisely - only make radiographs when there is patient-specific reason to believe there is a reasonable expectation the radiograph will offer unique information influencing diagnosis or treatment. Low-dose examinations should be made: intraoral imaging - use fast film or digital sensors, thyroid collars, rectangular collimation; panoramic and lateral cephalometric imaging - use digital systems or rare-earth film screen combinations; and cone beam computed tomography - use low-dose machines, restrict field size to region of interest, reduce mA and length of exposure arc as appropriate.
Topics: Humans; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Protection; Radiographic Image Enhancement; Radiography, Dental; Radiography, Dental, Digital; X-Ray Film
PubMed: 22376091
DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01665.x -
BioMed Research International 2021Radiation using conventional X-ray is associated with exposure of radiosensitive organs and typically requires the use of protection. This study is aimed at evaluating...
BACKGROUND
Radiation using conventional X-ray is associated with exposure of radiosensitive organs and typically requires the use of protection. This study is aimed at evaluating the use of bismuth shielding for radiation protection in pediatric pelvic radiography. The effects of the anteroposterior and lateral bismuth shielding were verified by direct measurements at the anatomical position of the gonads.
METHODS
Radiation doses were measured using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLD) and CIRS ATOM Dosimetry Verification Phantoms. Gonad radiographs were acquired using different shields of varying material (lead, bismuth) and thickness and were compared with radiographs obtained without shielding to examine the effects on image quality and optimal reduction of radiation dose. All images were evaluated separately by three pediatric orthopedic practitioners.
RESULTS
Results showed that conventional lead gonadal shielding reduces radiation doses by 67.45%, whereas dose reduction using one layer of bismuth shielding is 76.38%. The use of two layers of bismuth shielding reduces the dose by 84.01%. Using three and four layers of bismuth shielding reduces dose by 97.33% and 99.34%, respectively. Progressively lower radiation doses can be achieved by increasing the number of bismuth layers. Images obtained using both one and two layers of bismuth shielding provided adequate diagnostic information, but those obtained using three or four layers of bismuth shielding were inadequate for diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Bismuth shielding reduces radiation dose exposure providing appropriate protection for children undergoing pelvic radiography. The bismuth shielding material is lighter than lead, making pediatric patients more comfortable and less apt to move, thereby avoiding repeat radiography.
Topics: Bismuth; Child; Humans; Pelvis; Phantoms, Imaging; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Exposure; Radiation Protection; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; X-Rays
PubMed: 34671681
DOI: 10.1155/2021/9985714 -
Radiography (London, England : 1995) May 2024Suboptimal radiation protection evidenced in literature necessitated the development of a theory to optimise radiation protection. To develop a theory, concept analysis...
INTRODUCTION
Suboptimal radiation protection evidenced in literature necessitated the development of a theory to optimise radiation protection. To develop a theory, concept analysis of the central concept guiding the theory is required to provide explicit theoretical and operational definitions. This article presents the concept analysis of the central concept of 'facilitating a transformative radiation protection environment' used to develop a theory to optimise radiation protection.
METHODS
The study used Walker and Avant's concept analysis process of selecting a concept, determining the aims and purpose of analysis, identifying all uses of the concept, and determining the defining attributes by identifying a model case, a borderline case and a contrary case.
RESULTS
The central concept was dissected into the individual concepts of facilitating, transformative, radiation, protection, and environment to enhance the definition and conceptual meaning of the central concept. The essential and related attributes of the individual concepts informed the summative definition of the central concept, and a model, borderline and contrary case contributed to the conceptual meaning.
CONCLUSION
The summative definition of the central concept of "facilitating a transformative radiation protection environment" was determined to be through the essential attributes of help, process, change, X-rays, keeping safe considering the benefits versus risks of ionising radiation exposure and the total internal, external context within which persons exist and the related attributes.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Explored extensively in nursing literature, concept analyses in radiography are limited. Therefore, this article articulates the process of concept analysis and its use in radiography. Concept analysis provides a systematic process to analyse concepts often assumed to be understood, highlighting its importance in radiography literature and to educational praxis.
Topics: Humans; Radiation Protection; Concept Formation
PubMed: 38552562
DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.03.007 -
European Journal of Vascular and... May 2019The aim was to determine whether lead containing and lead free composite garments in current use provide the level of radiation protection stated by manufacturers.
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to determine whether lead containing and lead free composite garments in current use provide the level of radiation protection stated by manufacturers.
METHODS
Fifteen garments, produced by five different manufacturers using eight different composites, were randomly selected for testing from four hospitals in South Australia. Labelling, material composition, design, and condition of the garments were assessed by direct garment examination, garment label, and product information. Garment attenuation was tested in a simulated angiography suite using a Siemens Ysio Max digital Xray machine. The front and back panels of each garment were tested under direct beam at 100 kVp. A Perspex phantom was used to simulate the density and scatter properties of the human abdomen. The front panels of each garment were tested under scattered radiation at Xray tube voltages of 50 and 70 kVp.
RESULTS
Forty-seven per cent of front panels and 90% of back panels provided lower lead equivalence than claimed by the manufacturer. Twenty per cent of front panels and 62% of back panels tested did not meet the minimum International Electrotechnical Commission requirements for angiographic use. There was a 38 fold difference in front panel performance of garments to scatter radiation, which were all labelled 0.5 mm lead equivalence. 56% of garments had differences in scatter transmission of at least 49% when tested at 50 and 70 kVp.
CONCLUSION
The results show that lead containing and lead free composite garments probably provide less radiation protection than manufacturer stated lead equivalence. The demonstrated wide variations in attenuation of scatter radiation are greater than previously reported. It was found that most garments failed to comply with labelling standards. The study highlights challenges in radiation shielding and the need to identify composites that consistently provide better attenuation per unit weight than lead.
Topics: Angiography; Equipment Design; Equipment Failure Analysis; Humans; Product Labeling; Protective Clothing; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiology Department, Hospital; Scattering, Radiation; South Australia
PubMed: 31005510
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.01.031