Pub Date : 2024-09-13DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001833
Bastian Breustedt, Niranjan Chavan, Thomas Makumbi
Abstract: An R-code, which allows the calculation of the time dependent activity distribution based on ICRP reference models, the number of decays in a commitment period, and the dose coefficients for tissues and organs of the human body, has been developed. R Language was chosen due to its powerful mathematical and statistical modeling features, as well as its graphical capabilities. The developed set of functions and constants (called "INTDOSKIT") can be sourced in R-scripts that define or import the models and calculations to be performed. The code has been tested on models of several radionuclides and was successfully validated against reference data taken from ICRP OIR Data Viewer software. Furthermore, the code has been tested and verified on the modeling of the radioactivity of decay chains using data of the 233Ra model presented by Höllriegl and colleagues. The results of calculations with INTDOSKIT demonstrated that the code is able to reproduce the ICRP bioassay data and dose coefficients. Deviations are a few percent only and are due mainly to rounding in the original data. Lastly, the code is able to handle uncertainty and sensitivity studies as demonstrated by the results in a pilot study of injection of 241Am, which estimated geometric standard deviations (GSD) for dose coefficients ranging between 1.25 (bone-surface) and 1.66 (testes); these results are consistent with those obtained from similar studies done by other researchers who reported GSD values ranging from 1.13 to 1.73.
摘要:我们开发了一种 R 代码,可以根据国际放射防护委员会的参考模型计算随时间变化的放射性活度分布、承诺期内的衰变次数以及人体组织和器官的剂量系数。之所以选择 R 语言,是因为它具有强大的数学和统计建模功能以及图形功能。开发的函数和常量集(称为 "INTDOSKIT")可在 R 脚本中使用,以定义或导入要执行的模型和计算。该代码已在几种放射性核素的模型上进行了测试,并成功地与来自 ICRP OIR Data Viewer 软件的参考数据进行了验证。此外,还利用 Höllriegl 及其同事提供的 233Ra 模型数据,对该代码进行了衰变链放射性建模测试和验证。使用 INTDOSKIT 计算的结果表明,该代码能够再现 ICRP 的生物测定数据和剂量系数。偏差仅为百分之几,主要是由于原始数据的四舍五入造成的。最后,该代码能够处理不确定性和敏感性研究,对注入 241Am 的试验研究结果证明了这一点,该研究估计剂量系数的几何标准偏差(GSD)在 1.25(骨表面)和 1.66(睾丸)之间;这些结果与其他研究人员进行的类似研究得出的结果一致,其他研究人员报告的 GSD 值在 1.13 至 1.73 之间。
{"title":"INTDOSKIT: An R-Code for Calculation of Dose Coefficients and Studying Their Uncertainties.","authors":"Bastian Breustedt, Niranjan Chavan, Thomas Makumbi","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0000000000001833","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>An R-code, which allows the calculation of the time dependent activity distribution based on ICRP reference models, the number of decays in a commitment period, and the dose coefficients for tissues and organs of the human body, has been developed. R Language was chosen due to its powerful mathematical and statistical modeling features, as well as its graphical capabilities. The developed set of functions and constants (called \"INTDOSKIT\") can be sourced in R-scripts that define or import the models and calculations to be performed. The code has been tested on models of several radionuclides and was successfully validated against reference data taken from ICRP OIR Data Viewer software. Furthermore, the code has been tested and verified on the modeling of the radioactivity of decay chains using data of the 233Ra model presented by Höllriegl and colleagues. The results of calculations with INTDOSKIT demonstrated that the code is able to reproduce the ICRP bioassay data and dose coefficients. Deviations are a few percent only and are due mainly to rounding in the original data. Lastly, the code is able to handle uncertainty and sensitivity studies as demonstrated by the results in a pilot study of injection of 241Am, which estimated geometric standard deviations (GSD) for dose coefficients ranging between 1.25 (bone-surface) and 1.66 (testes); these results are consistent with those obtained from similar studies done by other researchers who reported GSD values ranging from 1.13 to 1.73.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142285890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: Millimeter waves (MMW) are pervasive in society; however, studies on the biological effects of MMW exposure are usually performed in laboratory settings not reflecting global environmental diversity. We investigated the effects of a 6-min exposure to 60 GHz MMW (wavelength, 5.0 mm) at incident power densities of 200 and 300 mW cm-2 in eyes (exposed right eyes vs. unexposed left eyes) under various ambient temperature/relative humidity environments (24 °C/50%, 45 °C/20%, and 45 °C/80%) using an in vivo rabbit model. Correlations were examined with adverse ocular events, including corneal epithelial damage (assessed using fluorescein staining), corneal opacity (evaluated by slit-lamp microscopy), and corneal thickness (measured via optical coherence tomography). Our findings indicate that higher temperatures and humidity tend to exacerbate MMW-induced ocular damage, albeit not significantly in the present study. Further research with a larger sample size is warranted. Incident power density emerged as a factor that was directly linked to the ocular damage threshold. High ambient temperature and humidity tended to exacerbate ocular damage from MMW exposure, although the effect was secondary. Ocular damage in a high-temperature (45 °C), high-humidity (80%) environment was increased to the same extent as that by incident power density increased by approximately 100 mW cm-2 in an ocular damage model in a standard environment (24 °C, 50%). In a high-humidity environment, the internal ocular tissue temperature increased at a high ambient temperature of 45 °C, suggesting that the eyeball may respond differently compared to other tissues.
{"title":"Effects of High Temperature and High Humidity on the Degree of Ocular Damage Caused by 60 GHz Millimeter Wave Exposure.","authors":"Masami Kojima, Takafumi Tasaki, Toshio Kamijo, Aki Hada, Yukihisa Suzuki, Masateru Ikehata, Hiroshi Sasaki","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001843","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0000000000001843","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Millimeter waves (MMW) are pervasive in society; however, studies on the biological effects of MMW exposure are usually performed in laboratory settings not reflecting global environmental diversity. We investigated the effects of a 6-min exposure to 60 GHz MMW (wavelength, 5.0 mm) at incident power densities of 200 and 300 mW cm-2 in eyes (exposed right eyes vs. unexposed left eyes) under various ambient temperature/relative humidity environments (24 °C/50%, 45 °C/20%, and 45 °C/80%) using an in vivo rabbit model. Correlations were examined with adverse ocular events, including corneal epithelial damage (assessed using fluorescein staining), corneal opacity (evaluated by slit-lamp microscopy), and corneal thickness (measured via optical coherence tomography). Our findings indicate that higher temperatures and humidity tend to exacerbate MMW-induced ocular damage, albeit not significantly in the present study. Further research with a larger sample size is warranted. Incident power density emerged as a factor that was directly linked to the ocular damage threshold. High ambient temperature and humidity tended to exacerbate ocular damage from MMW exposure, although the effect was secondary. Ocular damage in a high-temperature (45 °C), high-humidity (80%) environment was increased to the same extent as that by incident power density increased by approximately 100 mW cm-2 in an ocular damage model in a standard environment (24 °C, 50%). In a high-humidity environment, the internal ocular tissue temperature increased at a high ambient temperature of 45 °C, suggesting that the eyeball may respond differently compared to other tissues.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142106901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract: To discharge waste liquid containing radioactive iodine into sewage systems, long-term storage or dilution with a large amount of water may be required until the radioactivity concentration reduces below the standard value. Processing the waste liquid could be easier if radioactive iodine could be separated from the water. This study verified the effectiveness of superabsorbent polymer and α-cyclodextrin as treatment agents to separate radioactive iodine from waste liquids. Sodium iodide (Na 125 I) was added to purified water and artificial urine to prepare simulated waste liquids containing iodine equivalent to the urine of patients treated with radioactive iodine. The as-prepared simulated waste liquid was poured into a container with superabsorbent polymer and left for 90 d. The residual iodine rate in the simulated waste liquid was estimated by measuring 125 I radioactivity. When the water was sufficiently dried, residual iodine rates on day 15 were 0.102 and 0.884 in the simulated waste liquids comprising purified water and artificial urine, respectively. The simulated waste liquid comprising purified water with 5% α-cyclodextrin absorbed by 1 g of superabsorbent polymer had a residual rate of 0.980. Moreover, the residual rate of simulated waste liquid comprising artificial urine with 2% α-cyclodextrin absorbed by 1 g of SAP was 0.949. Superabsorbent polymer combined with α-cyclodextrin was an effective treatment agent for separating radioactive iodine from waste liquids.
{"title":"Feasibility of Treatment Agents in Radioactive Iodine Separation from Waste Liquids.","authors":"Masahiro Hirota, Shogo Higaki, Yoshiyuki Ishida, Daisuke Nakata, Keiji Terao, Shigeki Ito","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001780","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001780","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>To discharge waste liquid containing radioactive iodine into sewage systems, long-term storage or dilution with a large amount of water may be required until the radioactivity concentration reduces below the standard value. Processing the waste liquid could be easier if radioactive iodine could be separated from the water. This study verified the effectiveness of superabsorbent polymer and α-cyclodextrin as treatment agents to separate radioactive iodine from waste liquids. Sodium iodide (Na 125 I) was added to purified water and artificial urine to prepare simulated waste liquids containing iodine equivalent to the urine of patients treated with radioactive iodine. The as-prepared simulated waste liquid was poured into a container with superabsorbent polymer and left for 90 d. The residual iodine rate in the simulated waste liquid was estimated by measuring 125 I radioactivity. When the water was sufficiently dried, residual iodine rates on day 15 were 0.102 and 0.884 in the simulated waste liquids comprising purified water and artificial urine, respectively. The simulated waste liquid comprising purified water with 5% α-cyclodextrin absorbed by 1 g of superabsorbent polymer had a residual rate of 0.980. Moreover, the residual rate of simulated waste liquid comprising artificial urine with 2% α-cyclodextrin absorbed by 1 g of SAP was 0.949. Superabsorbent polymer combined with α-cyclodextrin was an effective treatment agent for separating radioactive iodine from waste liquids.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"365-372"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139416858","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-03-26DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001814
Marine Soret, Jacques-Antoine Maisonobe, Philippe Maksud, Stéphane Payen, Manon Allaire, Eric Savier, Charles Roux, Charlotte Lussey-Lepoutre, Aurélie Kas
Abstract: Radioembolization using 90 Y is a growing procedure in nuclear medicine for treating hepatocellular carcinoma. Current guidelines suggest postponing liver transplantation or surgical resection for a period of 14 to 30 d after radioembolization to minimize surgeons' exposure to ionizing radiation. In light of a radiation protection incident, we reevaluated the minimum delay required between radioembolization and subsequent liver transplantation. A patient with a hepatocellular carcinoma underwent a liver transplantation 44 h after undergoing radioembolization using 90 Y (860 MBq SIR-Spheres). No specific radioprotection measures were followed during surgery and pathological analysis. We subsequently (1) evaluated the healthcare professionals' exposure to ionizing radiation by conducting dose rate measurements from removed liver tissue and (2) extrapolated the recommended interval to be observed between radioembolization and surgery/transplantation to ensure compliance with the radiation dose limits for worker safety. The surgeons involved in the transplantation procedure experienced the highest radiation exposure, with whole-body doses of 2.4 mSv and extremity doses of 24 mSv. The recommended delay between radioembolization and liver transplantation was 8 d when using SIR-Spheres and 15 d when injecting TheraSphere. This delay can be reduced further when considering the specific 90 Y activity administered during radioembolization. This dosimetric study suggests the feasibility of shortening the delay for liver transplantation/surgery after radioembolization from the 8th or 15th day after using SIR-Spheres or TheraSphere, respectively. This delay can be decreased further when adjusted to the administrated activity while upholding radiation protection standards for healthcare professionals.
{"title":"Feasibility of Liver Transplantation after 90 Y Radioembolization: Lessons from a Radiation Protection Incident.","authors":"Marine Soret, Jacques-Antoine Maisonobe, Philippe Maksud, Stéphane Payen, Manon Allaire, Eric Savier, Charles Roux, Charlotte Lussey-Lepoutre, Aurélie Kas","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001814","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001814","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Radioembolization using 90 Y is a growing procedure in nuclear medicine for treating hepatocellular carcinoma. Current guidelines suggest postponing liver transplantation or surgical resection for a period of 14 to 30 d after radioembolization to minimize surgeons' exposure to ionizing radiation. In light of a radiation protection incident, we reevaluated the minimum delay required between radioembolization and subsequent liver transplantation. A patient with a hepatocellular carcinoma underwent a liver transplantation 44 h after undergoing radioembolization using 90 Y (860 MBq SIR-Spheres). No specific radioprotection measures were followed during surgery and pathological analysis. We subsequently (1) evaluated the healthcare professionals' exposure to ionizing radiation by conducting dose rate measurements from removed liver tissue and (2) extrapolated the recommended interval to be observed between radioembolization and surgery/transplantation to ensure compliance with the radiation dose limits for worker safety. The surgeons involved in the transplantation procedure experienced the highest radiation exposure, with whole-body doses of 2.4 mSv and extremity doses of 24 mSv. The recommended delay between radioembolization and liver transplantation was 8 d when using SIR-Spheres and 15 d when injecting TheraSphere. This delay can be reduced further when considering the specific 90 Y activity administered during radioembolization. This dosimetric study suggests the feasibility of shortening the delay for liver transplantation/surgery after radioembolization from the 8th or 15th day after using SIR-Spheres or TheraSphere, respectively. This delay can be decreased further when adjusted to the administrated activity while upholding radiation protection standards for healthcare professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"373-377"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140293332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-06-15DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001838
Joseph J Shonka
Abstract: This paper discusses the various analyses of the Trinity Nuclear Test, including how they might apply to the issue of infant mortality. This paper was first drafted as a response to a letter by Rice, who commented on my earlier letter on that issue. My earlier letter commented on the National Cancer Institute's 2020 series of papers in the October Issue of Health Physics on the impact of the Trinity Nuclear Test that was conducted on unoccupied government lands on 16 July 1945. The Journal editors requested that my response to Rice be edited and submitted as a paper to ensure adequate technical review and suggested that the article also add material summarizing the series of exchanges that were published in the Journal. This article suggests that significant differences exist between various summaries of the offsite impact of the Trinity Nuclear Test and offers that Trinity might be the largest nuclear accident in terms of the impact on uninvolved civilians who were downwind following the test. It suggests areas for further study to resolve these significant differences. It also asserts that until the estimated exposures of downwind residents are resolved and an appropriate study is made of infant deaths following the Trinity Nuclear Test, the issue of infant mortality remains an unanswered, 80-y-old question.
{"title":"Has Health Physics Contributed to an 80-y False Narrative about the Trinity Nuclear Test?","authors":"Joseph J Shonka","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001838","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001838","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>This paper discusses the various analyses of the Trinity Nuclear Test, including how they might apply to the issue of infant mortality. This paper was first drafted as a response to a letter by Rice, who commented on my earlier letter on that issue. My earlier letter commented on the National Cancer Institute's 2020 series of papers in the October Issue of Health Physics on the impact of the Trinity Nuclear Test that was conducted on unoccupied government lands on 16 July 1945. The Journal editors requested that my response to Rice be edited and submitted as a paper to ensure adequate technical review and suggested that the article also add material summarizing the series of exchanges that were published in the Journal. This article suggests that significant differences exist between various summaries of the offsite impact of the Trinity Nuclear Test and offers that Trinity might be the largest nuclear accident in terms of the impact on uninvolved civilians who were downwind following the test. It suggests areas for further study to resolve these significant differences. It also asserts that until the estimated exposures of downwind residents are resolved and an appropriate study is made of infant deaths following the Trinity Nuclear Test, the issue of infant mortality remains an unanswered, 80-y-old question.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"422-449"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141330826","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-07-11DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001834
Arjan van Dijk, Michiel de Bode, Astrid Kloosterman, Marte van der Linden, Jasper M Tomas
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to present a practical method for quick determination of potential radiological doses and contaminations by fallout from nuclear detonations, or other releases, that includes the contributions from all nuclides. We precalculate individual (total) activities of all radionuclides from any initial cocktail and all their ingrowing progeny at a set of pinpoints in time with a logarithmic time-spacing. This is combined with the set of dose conversion factors (DCC) for any exposure pathway to obtain a time-dependent cocktail for the whole release as if it is one substance. An atmospheric dispersion model then provides the thinning coefficient of the released material to give local concentrations and dose rates. Progeny ingrowth is illustrated for pure 238 U and for a nuclear reactor that has been shut down. Efficient dose assessment is demonstrated for fallout from nuclear detonations and compared with the traditional approach of preselecting nuclides for specific endpoints and periods-of-interest. The compound cocktail DCC reduces the assessment of contaminations and potential dose-effects from fallout after a nuclear detonation to (the atmospheric dispersion of) only one tracer substance, representing any cocktail of nuclides and their progeny. This removes the need to follow all separate nuclides or an endpoint-specific preselection of "most important nuclides." As the cocktail DCCs can be precalculated and the atmospheric dispersion of only one tracer substance has to be modelled, our method is fast. The model for calculating cocktail DCCs is freely available, easily coupled to any regular atmospheric dispersion model, and therefore ready for operational use by others.
{"title":"Modeling Fallout from Nuclear Weapon Detonations: Efficient Activity and Dose Calculation of Radionuclides and Their Progeny.","authors":"Arjan van Dijk, Michiel de Bode, Astrid Kloosterman, Marte van der Linden, Jasper M Tomas","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001834","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001834","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The purpose of this paper is to present a practical method for quick determination of potential radiological doses and contaminations by fallout from nuclear detonations, or other releases, that includes the contributions from all nuclides. We precalculate individual (total) activities of all radionuclides from any initial cocktail and all their ingrowing progeny at a set of pinpoints in time with a logarithmic time-spacing. This is combined with the set of dose conversion factors (DCC) for any exposure pathway to obtain a time-dependent cocktail for the whole release as if it is one substance. An atmospheric dispersion model then provides the thinning coefficient of the released material to give local concentrations and dose rates. Progeny ingrowth is illustrated for pure 238 U and for a nuclear reactor that has been shut down. Efficient dose assessment is demonstrated for fallout from nuclear detonations and compared with the traditional approach of preselecting nuclides for specific endpoints and periods-of-interest. The compound cocktail DCC reduces the assessment of contaminations and potential dose-effects from fallout after a nuclear detonation to (the atmospheric dispersion of) only one tracer substance, representing any cocktail of nuclides and their progeny. This removes the need to follow all separate nuclides or an endpoint-specific preselection of \"most important nuclides.\" As the cocktail DCCs can be precalculated and the atmospheric dispersion of only one tracer substance has to be modelled, our method is fast. The model for calculating cocktail DCCs is freely available, easily coupled to any regular atmospheric dispersion model, and therefore ready for operational use by others.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"404-421"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141633298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-01Epub Date: 2024-03-21DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001802
Lauren Finklea, Robert Goff, Erica Houghton
Abstract: Introduction: The current fleet of nuclear reactors in the United States is mandated to provide evidence that surrounding jurisdictions can screen their populations should an incident occur. Capacity can be measured as throughput in reception centers used for screening. Due to the significant staffing and resources required to exercise screening capacity, most jurisdictions typically perform smaller exercises and use models to estimate their overall throughput. Objective: To evaluate the applicability and realism of current throughput models and practices. Methods: Throughput capacity for radiation screening is estimated with a mathematical model derived by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a discrete event simulation model as a tool, SimPLER, to evaluate capacity and make throughput predictions. Model estimates will be compared and evaluated using timing data collected at a large-scale exercise. Results: The FEMA model estimated a throughput 41.2% higher than the actual radiation screening throughput, while the SimPLER model provided identical values. The FEMA and SimPLER models' predicted throughputs were 50% and 3.8%, respectively, higher than total exercise throughput. Applying each model to the throughput projections for a 12-hour shift, the FEMA model estimates ranged from 665 to 6,646 people and the SimPLER model yielded an estimated throughput of 1,809 people with a standard deviation of 74.6. Conclusion: Discrete event simulation models, such as SimPLER, may provide more realistic and accurate predictions of radiation screening and throughput capacity of reception centers than mathematical models such as the FEMA model.
{"title":"Evaluating Reception Center Models for Radiation Response Screening Capacity and Throughput Predictions.","authors":"Lauren Finklea, Robert Goff, Erica Houghton","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001802","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001802","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Introduction: The current fleet of nuclear reactors in the United States is mandated to provide evidence that surrounding jurisdictions can screen their populations should an incident occur. Capacity can be measured as throughput in reception centers used for screening. Due to the significant staffing and resources required to exercise screening capacity, most jurisdictions typically perform smaller exercises and use models to estimate their overall throughput. Objective: To evaluate the applicability and realism of current throughput models and practices. Methods: Throughput capacity for radiation screening is estimated with a mathematical model derived by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a discrete event simulation model as a tool, SimPLER, to evaluate capacity and make throughput predictions. Model estimates will be compared and evaluated using timing data collected at a large-scale exercise. Results: The FEMA model estimated a throughput 41.2% higher than the actual radiation screening throughput, while the SimPLER model provided identical values. The FEMA and SimPLER models' predicted throughputs were 50% and 3.8%, respectively, higher than total exercise throughput. Applying each model to the throughput projections for a 12-hour shift, the FEMA model estimates ranged from 665 to 6,646 people and the SimPLER model yielded an estimated throughput of 1,809 people with a standard deviation of 74.6. Conclusion: Discrete event simulation models, such as SimPLER, may provide more realistic and accurate predictions of radiation screening and throughput capacity of reception centers than mathematical models such as the FEMA model.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"353-358"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11321534/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140184264","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-01Epub Date: 2024-04-29DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001810
David L Boozer, David M Hamby
Abstract: Radionuclides emitting high-energy beta rays are frequently employed for therapeutic purposes in the field of medicine. However, it is widely recognized that such radionuclides have the potential to generate in vivo bremsstrahlung radiation. This research study focused on investigating the dose rate of bremsstrahlung radiation emanating from a radioactive source embedded in a patient. To accomplish this, we estimate the spectral energy distribution of the generated bremsstrahlung. By employing this spectral distribution, we present a novel method for estimating the bremsstrahlung dose rate kernel applicable to a given combination of source and material. This method considers photon buildup and attenuation, as well as the encapsulation of the radiation source. Furthermore, we provide formulas for both monoenergetic electrons and beta-transition electrons that account for radioactive decay.
{"title":"Bremsstrahlung Dose Rate Kernels in Tissue.","authors":"David L Boozer, David M Hamby","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001810","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001810","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Radionuclides emitting high-energy beta rays are frequently employed for therapeutic purposes in the field of medicine. However, it is widely recognized that such radionuclides have the potential to generate in vivo bremsstrahlung radiation. This research study focused on investigating the dose rate of bremsstrahlung radiation emanating from a radioactive source embedded in a patient. To accomplish this, we estimate the spectral energy distribution of the generated bremsstrahlung. By employing this spectral distribution, we present a novel method for estimating the bremsstrahlung dose rate kernel applicable to a given combination of source and material. This method considers photon buildup and attenuation, as well as the encapsulation of the radiation source. Furthermore, we provide formulas for both monoenergetic electrons and beta-transition electrons that account for radioactive decay.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"306-316"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141069980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-01Epub Date: 2024-05-17DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001800
Abstract: Airborne ultrasound is used for various purposes both in industrial and public settings, as well as being produced as a by-product by a range of sources. The International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) published interim guidelines on limiting human exposure to airborne ultrasound in 1984, based on the limited scientific evidence that was available at that time. In order to investigate whether research since 1984 requires the development of revised exposure guidelines we considered (a) within the context of ultrasound exposure the relevance to health of the biological endpoints/mechanisms listed in the IRPA guidelines, (b) the validity of the exposure limits, and (c) whether there are biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered in the guidelines. The analysis of the available evidence showed that the biological endpoints that form the basis of the guidelines are relevant to health and the guidelines provide limits of exposure based on the evidence that was available at the time. However, the IRPA limits and their associated dosimetry were based on limited evidence, which may not be considered as scientifically substantiated. Further, there is no substantiated evidence of biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered by the IRPA guidelines. These two observations could mean that IRPA's limits are too low or too high. Research since the IRPA guidelines has made some improvements in the knowledge base, but there are still significant data gaps that need to be resolved before a formal revision of the guidelines can be made by ICNIRP, including research needs related to health outcomes and improved dosimetry. This statement makes a number of recommendations for future research on airborne ultrasound.
{"title":"Validity of the 1984 Interim Guidelines on Airborne Ultrasound and Gaps in the Current Knowledge.","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001800","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001800","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Airborne ultrasound is used for various purposes both in industrial and public settings, as well as being produced as a by-product by a range of sources. The International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) published interim guidelines on limiting human exposure to airborne ultrasound in 1984, based on the limited scientific evidence that was available at that time. In order to investigate whether research since 1984 requires the development of revised exposure guidelines we considered (a) within the context of ultrasound exposure the relevance to health of the biological endpoints/mechanisms listed in the IRPA guidelines, (b) the validity of the exposure limits, and (c) whether there are biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered in the guidelines. The analysis of the available evidence showed that the biological endpoints that form the basis of the guidelines are relevant to health and the guidelines provide limits of exposure based on the evidence that was available at the time. However, the IRPA limits and their associated dosimetry were based on limited evidence, which may not be considered as scientifically substantiated. Further, there is no substantiated evidence of biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered by the IRPA guidelines. These two observations could mean that IRPA's limits are too low or too high. Research since the IRPA guidelines has made some improvements in the knowledge base, but there are still significant data gaps that need to be resolved before a formal revision of the guidelines can be made by ICNIRP, including research needs related to health outcomes and improved dosimetry. This statement makes a number of recommendations for future research on airborne ultrasound.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"326-347"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141069996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-01Epub Date: 2024-02-17DOI: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001798
Cecilia Vivarelli, Federica Censi, Giovanni Calcagnini, Rosaria Falsaperla, Eugenio Mattei
Abstract: The exponential diffusion of wearable medical devices (WMD) in recent years has involved people of all ages, including workers. Workers who use WMDs should be considered at a particular risk from electromagnetic fields, and in accordance with EU Directive 2013/35/EU, they require an individual risk assessment. Currently, there is no international standard that provides specific guidance on how to perform such a risk assessment. This paper focuses on the effects of electromagnetic fields on WMDs and does not consider the direct effects on human body tissues. It aims to offer practical recommendations to employers and/or health physicists for the risk assessment of workers with WMDs. Focusing on EU countries, we first describe the requirements outlined by the technical standard for the electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) of medical electrical equipment EN 60601-1-2. Then, some general guidelines on how to perform the risk assessment are provided. The assessment can be conducted by comparing the field values measured in the workplace with the immunity test levels specified in the technical standards of medical electrical equipment. If the measured values are lower than the immunity test levels indicated in the standard and the distance from the electromagnetic source is greater than the distance used by the manufacturer during the EMC (electromagnetic compatibility) tests (typically 30 cm), the risk for the worker may be considered acceptable. However, if the measured values exceed the immunity test levels or the distance criteria, a specific evaluation based on a case-by-case analysis is required.
{"title":"Risk Assessment for Workers with Wearable Medical Devices Exposed to Electromagnetic Fields.","authors":"Cecilia Vivarelli, Federica Censi, Giovanni Calcagnini, Rosaria Falsaperla, Eugenio Mattei","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001798","DOIUrl":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001798","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The exponential diffusion of wearable medical devices (WMD) in recent years has involved people of all ages, including workers. Workers who use WMDs should be considered at a particular risk from electromagnetic fields, and in accordance with EU Directive 2013/35/EU, they require an individual risk assessment. Currently, there is no international standard that provides specific guidance on how to perform such a risk assessment. This paper focuses on the effects of electromagnetic fields on WMDs and does not consider the direct effects on human body tissues. It aims to offer practical recommendations to employers and/or health physicists for the risk assessment of workers with WMDs. Focusing on EU countries, we first describe the requirements outlined by the technical standard for the electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) of medical electrical equipment EN 60601-1-2. Then, some general guidelines on how to perform the risk assessment are provided. The assessment can be conducted by comparing the field values measured in the workplace with the immunity test levels specified in the technical standards of medical electrical equipment. If the measured values are lower than the immunity test levels indicated in the standard and the distance from the electromagnetic source is greater than the distance used by the manufacturer during the EMC (electromagnetic compatibility) tests (typically 30 cm), the risk for the worker may be considered acceptable. However, if the measured values exceed the immunity test levels or the distance criteria, a specific evaluation based on a case-by-case analysis is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"269-275"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139939943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}