scholarly journals Radiological protection of the public during the normal operating of the Pilot-demonstration energy complex (PDEC) and in increased total power of reactor plants in the Industrial power complex (IPC) within the framework of the Proryv Project

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 5-23
Author(s):  
V.K. Ivanov ◽  
◽  
E.V. Spirin ◽  
S.S. Lovachev ◽  
A.N. Menyajlo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Normal Operation ◽  
Total Power ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Cancer Statistics ◽  
The Public ◽  
Energy Complex ◽  
Processing Module ◽  
Power Complex

The paper presents results of research on radiological protection of the public during normal op-eration of Pilot-demonstration energy complex (PDEC) and in increased total power of reactor plants in the Industrial power complex (IPC) based on the current national radiation safety stand-ards (NRB-99/2009), UNSCEAR conclusions and ICRP recommendations. To evaluate radiologi-cal protection of the public the concepts of radiological detriment (RD) and the level of radiation protection (LRP) were used. The concepts were also used to examine the compliance of the BREST-OD-300, fabrication/refabrication module, processing module, BR-1200 and BN-1200 re-actors, collectively called nuclear objects, with safety standards. RD and LRP were estimated with the use of data of the Russian national cancer statistics and cancer statistics of the regions, wherein nuclear objects are planned to be placed – Tomsk, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk. For the public residing nearby the nuclear objects the estimated LRP and RD meet NRB-99/2009 re-quirements concerning the restriction of radiation risk at the level of 10Е-5 from potential irradiation during a year. For the public of the critical group (girls younger than 5 years of age), residing nearby the PDEC and the nuclear objects the negligible risk of 10Е-6 can be achievable if annual radiation doses of 3H, for BREST-OD-300, reduce by 80%, and of annual doses of Cs-137, for the processing module reduce by 75%. The negligible risk for the public can be achieved if annual radiation doses of H-3 for BREST-OD-300 reduce by 10% and annual radiation doses of Cs-137 for processing module reduce by 5%. Projected radiation risk value for the public residing nearby BN-1200 and BR-1200 or nearby the IPC with two BR-1200 facilities will be much lower than the level of the negligible risk of 10Е-6. The RD calculated with ICRP methodology, serves as confirmation of the need to improve efficiency in cancer care in Tomsk region in order the regional RD to be at the national level. Because the high level of radiological protection of the public during the normal operation of the fabrication/refabrication module, its further operation when establishing IPC based on BR-1200 is feasible.

scholarly journals Potential radiological risk for the population during implementation of the Rosatom Proryv project. Part 2. Radiation detriment assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 48-68
Author(s):  
V.K. Ivanov ◽  
◽  
S.Yu. Chekin ◽  
A.N. Menyajlo ◽  
S.S. Lovachev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Radiation Safety ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Normal Operation ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Radiation Risks ◽  
Proryv Project ◽  
Current Health Care System

Nuclear power is effective and safe source of electricity. Meanwhile, uranium reserves in the earth's crust will run out in 100 years with the development of traditional nuclear reactors. The Rosatom “Proryv” project implementation will allow multiplying fuel sources for the new genera-tion nuclear power through the closing fuel cycle. Radiation safety of the new nuclear powers should be based on the state of the art Russian national and international regulations, as well as on predicted radiation doses, estimates of potential radiation risks and radiation detriment of the public. Developed methods for computational analysis of possible doses of estimates of radia-tion risks and population-based detriment, associated with atmospheric fallouts of radioactive substances from the BREST-OD-300 reactor, corresponds to the currently recognized approach-es to evaluating safety of nuclear energy facilities. Developed method for radiation detriment es-timating is in accordance with ICRP recommendations. It allows making assessment of radiation-associated health effects for Russian population with account of patients’ quality of life provided by the current health care system. The analysis of possible radiation doses and potential radia-tion risks shows that the upper 95% confidence bound of radiation detriment for the critical group of population in the town of Seversk (girls of 5 years of age) even in the event of beyond design basis accident at the reactor equals 1.1610-5 year-1, and does not exceed the radiation risk limit of 510-5 years-1, established by Russian national radiation safety regulations NRB-99/2009 for the population during normal operation of ionizing radiation sources. In the event of an accidental situation on the Brest-OD-300 reactor, the average estimates of radiation risks for the population living within the 30-km zone around the JSC “Siberian Chemical Combine” will generally remain in the range of negligible risk and will not exceed the level of 10-6 year-1.

scholarly journals Radiodine, I-131, release into the atmosphere during normal operation of the radiopharmaceutical production facility at the Karpov Institute of Physical Chemistry: analysis of I-131 concentration in the air and radiation dose to the population of the Obninsk city and its surroundings

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 103-111
Author(s):  
A.A. Buryakova ◽  
◽  
V.G. Bulgakov ◽  
A.I. Kryshev ◽  
M.N. Katkova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Chemistry ◽  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Calculated Data ◽  
Radiation Monitoring ◽  
Normal Operation ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Production Facility ◽  
Volume Activity ◽  
The Public ◽  
Karpov Institute

Radiodine, I-131, is released into atmosphere during normal operation of the radiopharmaceutical production facility at the Karpov Institute of Physical Chemistry (NIFKhl) in Obninsk city. The paper presents analysis of monitoring of I-131 concentration in the air and radiation dose to the population of the Obninsk and its surroundings. To estimate annual radiation doses to the public I-131 concentration in the environment was first calculated. Data of radiation monitoring carried out in Obninsk were used to confirm the correctness of computed mean annual volume activity of I-131 in the air. Annual radioiodine doses to the public of Obninsk and its surroundings calculated exposed to radiation between 2015 and 2019 were within the range of 0.5 to 2.0 µSv/year, this level was considerably lower the limit set for the population living near the NIFKhI (300 µSv/year). The risk from radioiodine released into the atmosphere in the period from 2015-2019 was negligible (<10Е-6 year-1).

scholarly journals 1275Lifetime cancer risks from occupational radiation exposure among workers at interventional radiology departments

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Won Jin Lee ◽  
Ye Jin Bang ◽  
Young Min Kim ◽  
Sung Bum Cho
Keyword(s):  
Interventional Radiology ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Cancer Risks ◽  
Potential Health ◽  
Occupational Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiologic Technologists ◽  
Occupational Radiation

Abstract Background Interventional medical radiation workers represent an under-studied population worldwide, although they receive relatively high occupational radiation doses. This study aimed to estimate the lifetime cancer risk from occupational radiation exposure among workers at interventional radiology departments. Methods A field survey of interventional medical workers in nationwide branches of the Korean Society of Interventional Radiology was conducted in 2017. Organ-specific radiation doses were estimated using national dose registry data and conversion coefficients provided by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Lifetime attributable risk (LAR) and lifetime fractional risk (LFR) were calculated based on realistic exposure scenarios using a radiation risk assessment tool. Results LARs from occupational radiation exposure until the age of retirement for all cancers combined were 338 (90.3-796.1), 121 (33.5-288.7), and 156 (41.1-390.6) per 100,000 individuals for male radiologists, male radiologic technologists, and female nurses, respectively. LFR for all cancers combined ranged from 0.22% (0.06-0.53) to 0.63% (0.17-1.47). Regarding the organ site, the highest LAR and LFR among all groups were observed for thyroid cancer. Conclusions This study provides timely evidence of potential cancer burden from the current levels of occupational radiation exposure among workers at interventional radiology departments. The risks varied by occupational groups, and workers, particularly interventional radiologists, need to be carefully monitored for radiation. Key messages We projected lifetime cancer risks from occupational radiation exposure among workers at interventional radiology departments in South Korea. Particularly, interventional radiologists, should be prioritized for careful protection from the potential health risks of occupational radiation exposure.

Radiopharmacology: Hazard or/and Benefit

1984 ◽  
Vol 23 (02) ◽  
pp. 87-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Flemming
Keyword(s):  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Late Effects ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Dose Effect ◽  
Radiation Hazard ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Low Doses ◽  
Medical Radiology ◽  
Experimental Findings ◽  
In The Beginning

SummaryIn the beginning of medical radiology, only the benefit of ionizing radiation was obvious, and radiation was handled and applied generously. After late effects had become known, the radiation exposure was reduced to doses following which no such effects were found. Thus, it was assumed that one could obtain an optimal medical benefit without inducing any hazard. Later, due to experimental findings, hypotheses arose (linear dose-effect response, no time factor) which led to the opinion that even low and lowest radiation doses were relevant for the induction of late effects. A radiation fear grew, which was unintentionally strengthened by radiation protection decrees: even for low doses a radiation risk could be calculated. Therefore, it was believed that there could still exist a radiation hazard, and the radiation benefit remained in question. If, however, all presently known facts are considered, one must conclude that large radiation doses are hazardous and low doses are inefficient, whereas lowest doses have a biopositive effect. Ionizing radiation, therefore, may cause both, hazard as well as benefit. Which of the two effects prevails is determined by the level of dose.

Requesting physicians’ knowledge of X-radiation exposure from computed tomography scan examinations: A case study of two Nigerian tertiary hospitals

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Samson O. Paulinus ◽  
Benjamin E. Udoh ◽  
Bassey E. Archibong ◽  
Akpama E. Egong ◽  
Akwa E. Erim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Ct Scan ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Tertiary Hospitals ◽  
Medical Exposure

Objective: Physicians who often request for computed tomography (CT) scan examinations are expected to have sound knowledge of radiation exposure (risks) to patients in line with the basic radiation protection principles according to the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the Protection of Persons Undergoing Medical Exposure or Treatment (POPUMET), and the Ionizing Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (IR(ME)R). The aim is to assess the level of requesting physicians’ knowledge of ionizing radiation from CT scan examinations in two Nigerian tertiary hospitals. Materials and Methods: An 18-item-based questionnaire was distributed to 141 practicing medical doctors, excluding radiologists with work experience from 0 to >16 years in two major teaching hospitals in Nigeria with a return rate of 69%, using a voluntary sampling technique. Results: The results showed that 25% of the respondents identified CT thorax, abdomen, and pelvis examination as having the highest radiation risk, while 22% said that it was a conventional chest X-ray. Furthermore, 14% concluded that CT head had the highest risk while 9% gave their answer to be conventional abdominal X-ray. In addition, 17% inferred that magnetic resonance imaging had the highest radiation risk while 11% had no idea. Furthermore, 25.5% of the respondents have had training on ionizing radiation from CT scan examinations while 74.5% had no training. Majority (90%) of the respondents were not aware of the ICRP guidelines for requesting investigations with very little (<3%) or no knowledge (0%) on the POPUMET and the IR(ME)R respectively. Conclusion: There is low level of knowledge of ionizing radiation from CT scan examinations among requesting physicians in the study locations.

Radiation Risk Assessment in Patients for Chest CT Diagnostics of COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-66
Author(s):  
E. Matkevich
Keyword(s):  
Older Persons ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Chest Ct ◽  
Risk Indicators ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Diagnostic Center ◽  
Adolescents And Adults ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
Effective Radiation

Purpose: To assess effective radiation doses for chest CT for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and calculate the radiation risk of the effects of this exposure. Material and methods: We analyzed the results of 1003 CT examinations of the chest performed in patients (6.2 %‒children 12–14 years, 15.3 %‒adolescents 15–19 years, 60.1 %‒adults 20–64 years, 18.4 %‒older persons 65 years and older) with suspected COVID-19 during one week in October 2020 in the city diagnostic center. In each group, the average effective dose (ED, mSv) was calculated. Results: The average ED values and confidence intervals (P=0.05) for patients with a single CT scan were: in children 2.59±0.19 mSv, in adolescents 3.23±0.17 mSv, in adults 3.43±0.08 mSv, in older persons 3.28±0.19 mSv. The maximum radiation risk indicators were observed in groups of children (24.1×10-5) and adolescents (23.3×10-5). For adult patients the means risk was 14.4×10-5. In groups of women radiation risk was 1.3–2.3 twice as high, as in male patients. The risk values in children, adolescents and adults are in the range 10×10-5 – 100×10-5 (low), for the older patients were 2.6×10-5 (very low). Conclusion: Because of the study established effective radiation doses for chest CT of patients with the diagnosis of COVID-19 and the radiation risk for 1-3 times chest CT by age and sex of patients was calculated. It was found that the radiation risk for single, double and triple chest CT for patients under 65 is low, 65 and older is very low. Taking into account the radiation risk during CT is necessary to reduce the long-term consequences of radiation exposure on the population.

MEASUREMENT OF EXTREMITY DOSES OF NUCLEAR ENERGY WORKER BY USING RING DOSIMETER

2019 ◽  
Vol 188 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-275
Author(s):  
M Tahidul Islam ◽  
J Ferdous ◽  
M M Haque
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Health Hazard ◽  
Extreme Case ◽  
Work Practice ◽  
Middle Finger ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Radiological Protection ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Average Dose

Abstract Finger doses can serve as a guide to suggest any needed modification in work practice to minimise radiation doses to the extremities. In the present study, radiation doses at the base of the middle finger of both hands of 20 nuclear energy workers handling 99mTc-labelled compounds,125I and131I during various diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in nuclear medicine were measured. The laboratory assessments were carried out by means of thermoluminescence ring dosimetry in Health Physics Division, Atomic Energy Center, Dhaka. The recorded extremity doses were then compared to their routinely monitored whole-body doses. The average annual finger doses recorded in this study were found to be 10.7 ± 8.2 and 12.7 ± 12.9 mSv, respectively, for the left- and right-hand fingers, which are at least 12-fold higher than the average whole-body dose. There was, however, no extreme case found of health hazard to the workers’ hand, which exceeds maximum dose limit 500 mSv/year given by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. On comparing the average annual finger doses at different labs, significantly higher average dose was recorded at isotope-dispensing lab (19.6 ± 12.6 mSv/year) and then followed by gamma camera lab (13.2 ± 12.1 mSv/year) and radioimmunoassay lab (7.0 ± 5.5 mSv/year). These observations are fairly in good agreement with the reported results. The observations of the present study, therefore, may be implemented for the betterment of safety for the occupational workers in nuclear medicine facilities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document