Practical Radiation Protection in Healthcare

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Radiation Effects ◽  
New Technology ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Healthcare Environment ◽  
Practical Guide ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Medical Physicists ◽  
Ionising Radiations

Practical Radiation Protection in Healthcare provides a practical guide for medical physicists and others involved with radiation protection in the healthcare environment. The guidance is based on principles set out in current recommendations of the International Commission for Radiological Protection and methods developed by a variety of professional bodies. Written by practitioners experienced in the field, this practical online reference covers both established techniques and new areas of application. This new edition is fully revised and updated to cover new requirements linked to the increased knowledge of radiation effects, and the development of new technology. Each specialist area is covered in a separate chapter to allow easy reference with individual chapters being assigned to different types of non-ionising radiations. Additionally, tabulated data is included to allow the reader to carry out calculations for situations encountered frequently without reference to further resources.

MINIMIZING THE EXPOSURE TO THE EYE LENS OF RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGISTS ASSISTING PATIENTS DURING CHEST X RAYS: A PHANTOM STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 193 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-54
Author(s):  
Yasuda Mitsuyoshi ◽  
Funada Tomoya ◽  
Sato Hisaya ◽  
Kato Kyoichi
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Phantom Study ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Eye Lens ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Radiologic Technologists ◽  
Maximum Reduction ◽  
The Right

Abstract As chest x rays involve risks of patients falling, radiologic technologists (technologists) commonly assist patients, and as the assistance takes place near the patients, the eye lenses of the technologists are exposed to radiation. The recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection suggest that the risk of developing cataracts due to lens exposure is high, and this makes it necessary to reduce and minimize the exposure. The present study investigated the positions of technologists assisting patients that will minimize exposure of the eye lens to radiation. The results showed that it is possible to reduce the exposure by assisting from the following positions: 50% at the sides rather than diagonally behind, 10% at the right side of the patient rather than the left and 40% at 250 mm away from the patient. The maximum reduction with radiation protection glasses was 54% with 0.07 mmPb and 72% with 0.88 mmPb.

scholarly journals Lessons learnt by IRSN about the involvement of experts towards the population in contaminated areas in Fukushima Prefecture

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 99-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Rollinger ◽  
J. Lochard ◽  
T. Schneider
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Living Conditions ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Fukushima Accident ◽  
Fukushima Prefecture ◽  
Local Actors ◽  
Measurement Devices

Since November 2011, Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire (IRSN) experts have participated in the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s (ICRP) dialogue initiative for the rehabilitation of living conditions after the Fukushima accident. In 2013, IRSN and Centre d’étude sur l’Evaluation de la Protection dans le domaine Nucléaire (CEPN) launched a study to identify the main lessons that can be learned from these dialogues, and benefit French IRSN experts in the event of a postaccident situation. The main lesson is that in order to protect the inhabitants of contaminated areas efficiently, experts must work in cooperation with local actors to develop a co-expertise process. The availability of measurement devices for inhabitants is crucial to allow them to assess their own radiological situation. Measuring radioactivity makes it visible, and allows individuals to discuss the results in their communities and develop local projects to improve their daily life. Eventually, inhabitants create a practical radiological protection culture to manage their situation. However, helping people to protect themselves does not mean that authorities and experts have no responsibilities, and this calls for strong ethical principles such as not making decisions for people about their future. To be helpful, scientists need to understand that, as necessary as radiation protection is, it is not the only problem that inhabitants are facing and it cannot control people's lives. Radiation protection experts must commit themselves to be at the service of individuals and the community, and the issues they want to address.

Experience in implementing ICRP recommendations: IRPA's perspective on the role of the radiation protection professional

2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 305-312
Author(s):  
K.R. Kase
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Ionising Radiation ◽  
International Congress ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
The Future ◽  
International Body

The International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) has a membership of approximately 17,000 individuals who are members of 48 national societies in 60 countries worldwide. As such, IRPA's vision is to be recognised as the international voice of the radiation protection professional. This article will discuss elements of the outcome of the 12th International Congress of IRPA (‘Focus on the future’), objectives and current activities of IRPA, criteria and priorities for the engagement of IRPA with international organisations, current IRPA initiatives in the areas of radiation protection culture and certification/qualification of radiation protection experts, planning for the 13th International Congress of IRPA, comments on the implementation of recent recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), and suggestions about IRPA and ICRP collaboration in their implementation. IRPA recognises that ICRP is the international body to determine policy and to make recommendations for protection against ionising radiation, and IRPA is in a position to participate in and facilitate the implementation of those recommendations.

Reference levels in the context of Fukushima - lessons learned and a challenge for the radiation protection system

2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 282-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Sakai
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Protection ◽  
School Children ◽  
General Public ◽  
Radiation Effects ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Protection System ◽  
Reference Level ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Plain Language

A number of dose criteria were set after the accident in Fukushima, including a criterion regarding the use of school playgrounds in Fukushima. Considering the band of 1–20 mSv/year recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) for public exposure under existing exposure situations, Japanese authorities set 20 mSv/year as a ‘start line’ for reducing the dose to school children. However, this led to considerable confusion among the general public and some experts. They thought that the dose limit was increased to 20 mSv/year (20 times as high as before), and that school children could be exposed to 20 mSv in 1 year. This is just an example of confusion caused by inadequate comprehension of radiation effects, misunderstanding of radiation protection concepts, or both. Another issue was raised regarding the higher radiosensitivity of children compared with adults. In the 2007 ICRP Recommendations, a higher risk coefficient is given to the whole population than the adult population, because the whole population includes children; a subpopulation with higher radiosensitivity and a longer life span. The point of argument was whether a lower reference level should be set for children alone. Radiation protection experts should continue to collect scientific information to improve the radiation protection system. In addition, it is the role of these experts to explain the framework of radiation protection to the general public in plain language.

The mandate and work of ICRP Committee 1 on radiation effects

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 83-90
Author(s):  
W. Rühm ◽  
N. Ban ◽  
M. Tirmarche
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Effects ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Organ Damage ◽  
Ionising Radiation ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Developmental Defects ◽  
Beneficial Use ◽  
Task Groups

The aim of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is to protect humans against cancer and other diseases and effects associated with exposure to ionising radiation, and also to protect the environment, without unduly limiting the beneficial use of ionising radiation. As of the second half of 2017, four committees are contributing to the overall mission of ICRP, including Committee 1 (Radiation Effects). The role of Committee 1 includes consideration of the risks and mechanisms of induction of cancer and heritable disease; discussion of the risks, severity, and mechanisms of induction of tissue/organ damage and developmental defects; and review of the effects of ionising radiation on non-human biota at population level. This paper gives an overview of the recent activities of Committee 1, and discusses the focus of its active task groups.

scholarly journals Challenges for managing the cumulative effective dose for patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 93 (1116) ◽  
pp. 20200814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliseo Vano
Keyword(s):  
Effective Dose ◽  
Radiation Effects ◽  
Risk Estimation ◽  
Patient Dose ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Cumulative Effective Dose ◽  
Number Of Patients

Notwithstanding that 100 mSv is not a threshold for radiation effects, cumulative effective dose (CED) for patients of ≥100 mSv derived from recurrent imaging procedures with ionising radiation has been recently the topic of several publications. The International Commission on Radiological Protection has alerted on the problems to use effective dose for risk estimation in individual patients but has accepted to use this quantity for comparison the relative radiation risks between different imaging modalities. A new International Commission on Radiological Protection document on the use of effective dose (including medicine), is in preparation. Recently published data on the number of patients with CED ≥100 mSv ranged from 0.6 to 3.4% in CT and around 4% in interventional radiology. The challenges to manage the existing situation are summarised. The main aspects identified are: 1) New technology with dose reduction techniques. 2) Refinements in the application of the justification and optimisation for these groups of patients. 3) Patient dose management systems with alerts on the cumulative high doses. 4) Education on the proper use of cumulative effective dose for referrers and practitioners including information for patients. 5) Future research programmes in radiation biology and epidemiology may profit the patient dose data from the groups with high cumulative dose values.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document