Active Personal Dosemeters Research Articles

Systematic study on the influence of inductive chargers on active personal dosemeters

Systematic study on the influence of inductive chargers on active personal dosemeters

Comparison of experimental measurements and fast Monte Carlo simulations for typical set-ups in fluoroscopically-guided interventional procedures

PyMCGPU-IR is an application based on the Monte Carlo code MCGPU-IR that automatically retrieves procedure information from X-ray systems and medical worker positions from a tracking camera system. PyMCGPU-IR calculates personal dose equivalent values, doses in organs and effective dose values for both patient and medical staff in interventional radiology procedures and displays them visually. The code's main advantage lies in its time efficiency, enabling simulations in under 2 min with statistical uncertainties below 5% (k = 2).This study involved testing in a hospital room using an interventional X-ray system. A RANDO phantom simulated the patient, with passive dosimeters affixed to the back for measuring skin dose values. A PMMA slab phantom represented the operator, with passive and active dosimeters affixed to its front surface to measure Hp(10). The irradiation conditions were simulated with PyMCGPU-IR using voxelized geometries to represent both phantoms. Results demonstrate good agreement between PyMCGPU-IR simulations and measured patient skin dose values, with differences of up to 5% for mean skin dose and up to 14% for the peak skin dose. Concerning Hp(10) values on the operator phantom, PyMCGPU-IR calculated values fall within the uncertainty ranges of dosimeter measurements for most points. The highest Hp(10) discrepancy is 42%, which is acceptable when compared with the typical variability observed between active and passive personal dosimeters measurements in interventional radiology. The results demonstrate PyMCGPU-IR's satisfactory performance for patient and personal dosimetry, compared to existing solutions like commercial skin dose calculation software and personal physical dosimeters.

Alerts to improve occupational protection during Interventional Radiology. More attention is needed for simple but frequent procedures

Occupational protection could be improved in interventional radiology. The monthly personal dosimetry cannot alert on some occupational doses with anomalous values for certain procedures. Active electronic personal dosimeters linked wireless to a dose management system (DMS), allow for the measurement of occupational doses per procedure, integrating this information with patient dose indicators and with technical and geometrical conditions of the procedures.We analysed around 3100 occupational dose values for individual procedures collected during the last two years, in an interventional radiology laboratory of a University Hospital and two groups, with patient doses higher than 100 Gy.cm2, and lower than 30 Gy.cm2.An unshielded reference dosimeter located at the C-arm registers the ambient dose equivalent (ADE) per procedure to be compared with the personal dose equivalent (PDE) over the apron. The ratio between both values PDE/ADE is a good indication of occupational protection. Alerts for occupational protection optimisation are suggested.For the full sample, 8.4 % of occupational doses measured over the protective apron of the interventionists were higher than 100 µSv and 3.8 % higher than 200 µSv per procedure. Occupational protection for complex procedures (>100 Gy.cm2) had median values of 46 µSv for PDE and 3.3 % for PDE/ADE. However, for simple procedures, (<30 Gy.cm2) the median values were 10 µSv and 28.4 %. This last percentage is 9 times higher than the value for complex procedures. This lack of protection should be corrected and the need to reduce some occupational doses reinforced in radiation protection training programmes for interventionists.

EURADOS intercomparison for whole-body neutron dosemeters from 2012 to 2022

Within the EURADOS (European Radiation Dosimetry Group) self-sustained programme of regular intercomparisons (ICs) for individual monitoring, three campaigns had been performed in 2012, 2017 and 2022 to assess the performance of neutron personal dosemeters routinely used to measure personal dose equivalent, Hp(10). The irradiation schemes were established to provide participants with useful information regarding linearity, reproducibility and response of their dosimetry systems at different energies and angles of incidence. Small alterations were made in irradiation plans for subsequent exercises. Combinations of standard calibration fields and simulated workplace fields were employed, using bare and moderated neutron sources as well as monoenergetic and thermal neutron fields. Neutron energies used to evaluate dosemeter performance ranged from thermal to several MeV. Dose values varied between 0.3 mSv and 15 mSv. The number of participating laboratories in the three campaigns was stable: 31 in IC2012n, 32 in IC2017n and 29 in IC2022n. The dosimetry systems could have been categorized according to their detection principle into albedo and track dosemeters, or a combination of both. In 2012, a category ‘other’ had to be introduced to consider active personal dosemeters and fission track detectors. In 2012, participants were asked to provided results in a two-step procedure: (i) with no information on the radiation fields, and (ii) after receiving additional simplified a priori information on the energy distribution of the neutron fields to enable correction for dosemeter response. In 2017 and 2022, based on a one-step procedure, however, participants might have requested a priori information upon registration, which was reported in the certificate of participation. Intercomparison results were analysed against the acceptance criteria of the ISO 14146:2018 standard, although there were no standardized performance requirements for neutron personal dosemeters at the time of IC2012n. The paper compares the results of the three exercises, identifies major problems for individual monitoring services and shows trends in dosimetric performance. In all three intercomparisons, a few systems had shown problems related to calibration. Data do not allow to draw a universally applicable conclusion with regard to potentially superior performance of one particular dosimetry system.

The ESA Active Dosimeter (EAD) system onboard the International Space Station (ISS)

Ionizing radiation in general and mixed fields of space radiation in particular pose a risk of serious harm to human health. The risk of such adverse effects increases with the duration of the mission, and for all missions outside the protective properties of the Earth’s magnetic field and atmosphere. Accordingly, radiation protection is of central importance for all human spaceflight, which is recognized by all international space agencies. To date various systems, analyze and determine the exposure to ionizing radiation within the environment and to the crew onboard the International Space Station (ISS). In addition to this operational monitoring, experiments and technology demonstrations are carried out. This to further enhance systems capabilities, to prepare for exploratory missions, to the Deep Space Gateway and/or to enable for human presence at other celestial bodies. Subsequently the European Space Agency (ESA) decided early to support the development of an active personal dosimeter. Under the auspices of the European Space Research and Technology Center (ESTEC) together with the European Astronaut Center's (EAC) Medical Operations and Space Medicine (HRE-OM) team, a European industrial consortium was formed to develop, build, and test this system. To complete the ESA Active Dosimeter (EAD) Technology Demonstration in space, EAD components were delivered to ISS with the ESA’s space missions ‘iriss’ and ‘proxima’ in 2015 and 2016. This marked Phase 1 (2015) and 2 (2016–2017) of the EAD Technology Demonstration to which focus is given in this publication. All EAD systems and their functionalities, the different radiation detector, their properties, and calibrations procedures are described. Emphasis is first on the “iriss” mission of September 2015, that provided a complete set of data for an entire space mission from launch to landing, for the first time. Data obtained during Phase 2 in 2016–2017 are discussed thereafter. Measurements with the active radiation detectors of the EAD system provided data of the absorbed dose, dose equivalent, quality factor as well as the various dose contributions during the crossings of the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA) and/or resulting from galactic cosmic radiation (GCR). Results of the in-flight cross-calibrations among the internal sensors of the EAD systems are discussed and alternative usage of the EAD Mobile Units as area monitors at various different locations inside the ISS is described.

Advances in personal dosimetry towards real-time dosimetry

This objective of this paper is to give a short overview of the state-of-the-art of personal dosimetry, more specifically focussing on the advances towards real-time dosimetry. The use of active personal dosemeters has been common practice since a few decades, especially in the nuclear industry, but the large majority of the workers are still using passive personal dosemeters to monitor their doses and compare them to the legal dose limits. Besides passive personal dosimeters, many types of active personal dosemeters (APDs) exist that have equally good, or even better technical characteristics than those of passive dosemeters. Although improvements are also still needed for APDs (like for beta radiation and pulsed fields), the reason that they are not more often used for legal dosimetry has more to do with non-technical reasons, like the need to set-up a QC/QA system, and a higher cost. Recently new types of dosemeters have appeared on the market that are a mix between active and passive dosemeters. They can find their way to widespread use by being small and relatively cheap, while still offering some advantages for ALARA applications. The newest developments in personal dosimetry go in the direction of computational techniques. By using motion capture with cameras combined with fast Monte Carlo radiation transport simulations, the doses of workers can be calculated in near real time if the radiation source is known. So there are some exciting times ahead for personal dosimetry.

Development of back-illuminated thin silicon diode applied to fast neutron sensor in active personal dosimeter

A back-illuminated thin Si diode was developed for fast neutron sensor in active personal neutron dosimeter for detecting fast neutrons below 1 MeV. Neutron response functions for the fast neutron sensor with the back-illuminated thin Si diode were evaluated based on measurements of monoenergetic neutron beams at the National Metrology Institute of Japan and Monte Carlo simulations using the Particle Heavy Ion Transport Code System in the neutron energy over 500 keV. The lower limit of neutron detection energy was decreased to 500 keV and neutron detection efficiencies were increased several times over other fast neutron sensors. It is possible to measure neutron doses in the neutron energy range of 500 keV–1 MeV using this novel fast neutron sensor, but the neutron doses were undetectable using other fast neutron sensors. The neutron detection efficiencies were closer to the personal dose equivalent conversion curve than those for other fast neutron sensors in this neutron energy range. Neutron doses of individuals employed at a nuclear facility were evaluated using the active personal neutron dosimeter, which consists of both the novel fast and slow neutron sensors.

What Is Worth Knowing in Interventional Practices about Medical Staff Radiation Exposure Monitoring: A Review of Recent Outcomes of EURADOS Working Group 12

EURADOS (European Radiation Dosimetry Group) Working Group 12 (WG12) SG1 activities are aimed at occupational radiation protection and individual monitoring in X-ray and nuclear medicine practices. In recent years, many studies have been carried out in these fields, especially for interventional radiology and cardiology workplaces (IC/IR). The complexity of the exposure conditions of the medical staff during interventional practices makes the radiation protection and monitoring of the exposed workers a challenging task. The scope of the present work is to review some of the main results obtained within WG12 activities about scattered field characterization and personal dosimetry that could be very useful in increasing the quality of radiation protection of the personnel, safety, and awareness of radiation risk. Two papers on Monte Carlo modelling of interventional theater and three papers on active personal dosimeters (APDs) for personnel monitoring were considered in the review. More specifically, Monte Carlo simulation was used as the main tool to characterize the levels of exposure of the medical staff, allowing to determine how beam energy and direction can have an impact on the doses received by the operators. Indeed, the simulations provided information about the exposure of the operator’s head, and the study concluded with the determination of an eye-lens protection factor when protection goggles and a ceiling shielding are used. Moreover, the review included the results of studies on active personal dosimeters, their use in IC/IR workplaces, and how they respond to calibration fields, with X-ray standard and pulsed beams. It was shown that APDs are insensitive to backscatter radiation, but some of them could not respond correctly to the very intense pulsed fields (as those next to the patient in interventional practices). The measurements during interventional procedures showed the potential capability of the employment of APDs in hospitals.

Occupational eye dose correlation with neck dose and patient-related quantities in interventional cardiology procedures.

Occupational eye dose monitoring during interventional radiology and interventional cardiology is important to avoid radiation-induced cataracts. The aim of this study was to assess the eye dose correlation with neck dose and patient-related quantities for interventional cardiology physicians and nurses. The originality of this study lies in obtaining correlations between the location of the dosimeter and eye dose radiation readings among different procedures and practitioners. The doses were measured for each procedure (18 procedures of coronary angiography and 16 procedures of percutaneous coronary intervention) using an active personal dosimeter. The eye dose for physicians was not correlated with the neck dose. The eye dose for nurses had a good correlation with the neck dose during both coronary angiography (R2 = 0.91) and percutaneous coronary intervention (R2 = 0.93). Kerma-area product values may be used for a rough estimation of the eye dose for physicians during routine coronary angiography procedures (R2 = 0.76). For nurses, the neck dose is a good proxy for the eye dose during coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention procedures.

Radiation distribution in a hybrid operating room, utilizing different X-ray imaging systems: investigations to minimize occupational exposure

ObjectivesTo reduce occupational radiation exposure in a hybrid operating room (OR) used for three-dimensional (3D) image guided spine procedures. The effects of staff positioning, different X-ray imaging systems, and freestanding...

Occupational radiation dose of personnel involved in sentinel node biopsy procedure.

Sentinel node biopsy is a procedure used for axillary nodal staging in breast cancer surgery. The process uses radioactive 99mTc isotope for mapping the sentinel node(s) and all the staff involved in the procedure is potentially exposed to ionizing radiation. The colloid for radiolabelling (antimone-sulphide) with 99mTc isotope (half-life 6h) is injected into the patient breast. The injection has activity of 18.5MBq. The surgeon removes the primary tumor and detects active lymph nodes with gamma detection unit. The tumor as well as the active nodal tissue is transferred to pathologist for the definitive findings. The aim of the study was to measure dose equivalents to extremities and whole body for all staff and suggest practice improvement in order to minimize exposure risk. The measurements of the following operational quantities were performed: Hp(10) personal dose equivalent to whole body and Hp(0.07) to extremities for staff as well as ambiental dose for operating theatre and during injection. Hp(0.07) were measured at surgeon's finger by ring thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) type MTS-N, and reader RADOS RE2000. Surgeon and nurse were wearing TLD personal dosimeter at the chest level. Anesthesiologist and anesthetist were wearing electronic personal dosimeters, while pathologist was wearing ring TLD while manipulating tissue samples. Electronic dosimeters used were manufactured by Polimaster, type PM1610. All TLD and electronic dosimeters data were reported, including background radiation. Background radiation was also monitored separately. Personal TLDs are standard for this type of personal monitoring, provided by accredited laboratory. Measurements of ambiental dose in workplaces of other staff involved around the patient was performed before the surgery took place, by calibrated survey meters manufactured by Atomtex, type 1667. The study involved two surgeons and one pathologist, two anesthesiologists and three anesthetists during two months period. The doses received by all staff are evaluated using passive and active personal dosimeters and ambiental dose monitors and practice was improved based on results collected. Average annual whole body dose for all staff involved in the procedure was less than 0.8mSv. Extremity dose equivalents to surgeon and pathologist were far below the limits set for professionally exposed (surgeon) and for public (pathologist). Although has proven to be very safe for all staff, additional measures for radiation protection, in accordance to ALARA principle (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) should be conducted. The recommendations for practice improvement with respect to radiation protection were issued.

Recommendations for the use of active personal dosemeters (APDs) in interventional workplaces in hospitals.

Occupational radiation doses from interventional procedures have the potential to be relatively high. The requirement to optimise these doses encourages the use of electronic or active personal dosimeters (APDs) which are now increasingly used in hospitals. They are typically used in tandem with a routine passive dosimetry monitoring programme, with APDs used for real-time readings, for training purposes and when new imaging technology is introduced. However, there are limitations when using APDs. A survey in hospitals to identify issues related to the use of APDs was recently completed, along with an extensive series of APD tests by the EURADOS Working Group 12 on Dosimetry for Medical Imaging. The aim of this review paper is to summarise the state of the art regarding the use of APDs. We also used the results of our survey and our tests to develop a set of recommendations for the use of APDs in the clinical interventional radiology/cardiology settings, and draw attention to some of the current challenges.

An assessment of performance of active personal dosimeters (APDs) in interventional radiology for use in personnel dose estimation as part of a risk assessment

The Environmental Protection Agency has recommended the introduction of procedural risk assessments for estimation of occupational doses. Active personal dosimeters (APDs), such as the RaySafe i2TM dosimeter, allow the active monitoring of deep dose equivalent at 10mm, Hp(10). The aim of this research was to investigate the performance of the Raysafe i2TM APD under clinical conditions in interventional radiology to assess its accuracy and suitability for dose measurements in risk assessments.

Occupational exposure in a PET/CT facility using two different automatic infusion systems.

The aim of this study was to measure the occupational exposure using active personal dosimeters (APD) in the PET/CT department at different stages of the operation chain i.e. radiopharmaceutical arrival, activity preparation, dispensing, injection, patient positioning, discharge and compare the radiation exposure doses received using two automatic injection/infusion systems. This paper also reflects optimization processes that were performed to reduce occupational exposure. Measured APD data were analysed for medical physicists, radiology technologists and administrative staff from 2014 till 2018. For dispensing and injecting 18F-FDG, the automatic infusion/injection system IRIDE (Comecer, Italy) or the automatic fractionator ALTHEA (Comecer, Italy) with wireless injection system WIS (Comecer, Italy) were used. Radiation exposure optimization methods were applied during the data collection period (installation of the transport port, patient management, APD alarm threshold and etc.). Radiology technologists who perform injection procedures, regardless of the automatic infusion system, received the highest radiation exposure dose. The average doses to the radiology technologists per one study were 1.72±0.33 μSv and 1.16±0.11 μSv with ALTHEA/WIS and IRIDE system, respectively. The average dose for accompanying the patient to the PET/CT scanner and scan procedure was 0.52±0.07 μSv. For the medical physicists, the average dose was 0.29±0.09 µSv. The measured dose for administrative staff was 0.30±0.15 μSv. Occupational exposure can be effectively optimized by different means including staff monitoring with APD, implementation of radiation safety culture and the usage of automatic infusion systems.

Combining Optimized Image Processing With Dual Axis Rotational Angiography: Toward Low-Dose Invasive Coronary Angiography.

BackgroundDual axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA) reduces radiation exposure during coronary angiography on older x‐ray systems. The purpose of the current study is to quantify patient and staff radiation exposure using DARCA on a modality already equipped with dose‐reducing technology. Additionally, we assessed applicability of 1 dose area product to effective dose conversion factor for both DARCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) procedures.Methods and ResultsTwenty patients were examined using DARCA and were compared with 20 age‐, sex‐, and body mass index–matched patients selected from a prior study using CCA on the same x‐ray modality. All irradiation events are simulated using PCXMC (STUK, Finland) to determine organ and effective doses. Moreover, for DARCA each frame is simulated. Staff dose is measured using active personal dosimeters (DoseAware, Philips Healthcare, The Netherlands). With DARCA, median cumulative dose area product is reduced by 57% (ie, 7.41 versus 17.19 Gy·cm2). Effective dose conversion factors of CCA and DARCA are slightly different, yet this difference is not statistically significant. The occupational dose at physician's chest, leg, and collar level are reduced by 60%, 56%, and 16%, respectively, of which the first 2 reached statistical significance. Median effective dose is reduced from 4.75 mSv in CCA to 2.22 mSv in DARCA procedures, where the latter is further reduced to 1.79 mSv when excluding ventriculography.ConclusionsDuring invasive coronary angiography, DARCA reduces radiation exposure even further toward low‐dose values on a system already equipped with advanced image processing and noise reduction algorithms. For both DARCA and CCA procedures, using 1 effective dose conversion factor of 0.30 mSv·Gy−1·cm−2 is feasible.

CONVERSION FACTOR FROM DOSEMETER READING TO AIR KERMA FOR NUCLEAR WORKER USING ANTHROPOMORPHIC PHANTOM FOR FURTHER CONVERSION FROM AIR KERMA TO ORGAN-ABSORBED DOSE.

Estimation of cancer risk based on the organ-absorbed dose is underway for the Japanese Epidemiological Study on Low-Dose Radiation Effects (J-EPISODE). The reconstruction method for the organ-absorbed dose follows the approach adopted in the IARC 15-Country Collaborative Study, which examined the dosemeter response to photon exposure for the old film badge (FB) type, a multi-element FB and a thermoluminescence dosemeter. Until 2000, the dosemeters used in Japan were almost the same in the IARC study, so IARC study data could be used as they were. However, since 2000, the type of dosemeter has been replaced with active personal dosemeters (hereafter called electronic personal dosemeters), radio-photoluminescent glass dosemeters (Glass badge) and optically stimulated luminescence dosemeters (Luminess badge). Hence, it was necessary to collect these data again. A dosemeter response experiment was conducted using a device that irradiated an anthropomorphic phantom in the Japan Atomic Energy Agency calibration laboratories. The aim of the paper is to provide a conversion factor from reading in terms of Hp(10) to air kerma for realistic conditions for further conversion from air kerma to organ-absorbed dose. The obtained dosemeter responses for the dosemeter types currently used in Japan were consistent with those in the IARC study. These data will be utilized for J-EPISODE in reconstructing the organ-absorbed dose.

THE USE OF ACTIVE PERSONAL DOSEMETERS IN INTERVENTIONAL WORKPLACES IN HOSPITALS: COMPARISON BETWEEN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE DOSEMETERS WORN SIMULTANEOUSLY BY MEDICAL STAFF

Medical staff in interventional procedures are among the professionals with the highest occupational doses. Active personal dosemeters (APDs) can help in optimizing the exposure during interventional procedures. However, there can be problems when using APDs during interventional procedures, due to the specific energy and angular distribution of the radiation field and because of the pulsed nature of the radiation. Many parameters like the type of interventional procedure, personal habits and working techniques, protection tools used and X-ray field characteristics influence the occupational exposure and the scattered radiation around the patient. In this paper, we compare the results from three types of APDs with a passive personal dosimetry system while being used in real clinical environment by the interventional staff. The results show that there is a large spread in the ratios of the passive and active devices.

Dependence of Response of Active Personal Dosimeters on Different Calibration Methods

Active personal dosimeters (APDs) are used by occupationally exposed workers to measure the dose equivalent of radiation that they were exposed to. These dosimeters need to be calibrated to ensure that the dosimeters are accurate. There are two methods for which the APD can be calibrated: the accumulative method and the staggered method. However, there is no recommendation on which of the two calibration methods is most suitable for use. This study aimed to investigate the dependence of the response of APD with various detectors on the two calibration methods. In this work, APDs were irradiated to different dose values of 0.5, 0.1, and 1.5 mSv using accumulative method and staggered method at the Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory – Radiation Protection Services Section (SSDL-RPSS) of the Department of Science and Technology – Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (DOST-PNRI). The results showed that APDs have better response in the staggered method compared to accumulative method and best reflects the practical conditions in the use of the APDs in the field. The results of the study could, therefore, be a basis in developing a more standardized protocol and procedure for the calibration of APDs.

DETERMINING THE DOSE RATE DEPENDENCE OF DIFFERENT ACTIVE PERSONAL DOSEMETERS IN STANDARDIZED PULSED AND CONTINUOUS RADIATION FIELDS.

In 2016, the EURADOS working group 12 started a project to gather reliable data concerning the behavior of active personal dosemeters (APDs) used by European hospitals in standardized pulsed and hospital fields. This paper concentrates on the tests that deal with the dose rate dependence of APDs in laboratory tests. The dependence on the dose rate was determined for 10 dosemeter types with continuous radiation of a 60Co source and pulsed radiation of the reference radiation facility of Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt. Furthermore, irradiations were done with continuous radiation of a 137Cs source of the Karlsruher Institute of Technology and with continuous X-rays of the two radiation qualites in radiation beams emerging from the X-ray source assembly, RQR5 and RQR8, of Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine. For the first time, APDs have been systematically investigated under laboratory conditions in a pulsed reference fields according to ISO/TS 18090-1 and the experience gained by these test procedures will be included in the new IEC/TS 63050.

Effect of the radiation protective apron on the response of active and passive personal dosemeters used in interventional radiology and cardiology

In fluoroscopy guided interventional procedures, workers use protective garments and often two personal dosemeters, the readings of which are used for the estimation of the effective dose; whereas the dosemeter above the protection can be used for the estimation of the equivalent dose of the lens of the eye. When a protective apron is worn the scattered field that reaches the dosemeter is different from the case where no protection is used; this study analyses the changes in the response of seven passive and eight active personal dosemeters (APDs) when they are placed above a lead or lead equivalent garment for S-Cs and x-ray diagnostic qualities. Monte Carlo simulations are used to support the experimental results. It is found that for passive dosemeters, the influence on the dosemeter’s response to the lead or lead equivalent was within the range 15%–38% for the x-ray qualities. This effect is smaller, of the order of 10%, when lead-free garments are used, and much smaller, within 1%–10%, for most of the APDs used in the study. From these results it is concluded that when comparing passive and active dosemeter measurements worn above the protection, a difference of 20%–40% is expected. The effect is small when deriving the effective dose from double dosimetry algorithms, but it can be of major importance when eye lens monitoring is based on the use of the dosemeter worn above the protection.