Use of active personal dosemeters in interventional radiology and cardiology: Tests in hospitals - ORAMED project

Although active personal dosemeters (APDs) are not used quite often in hospital environments, the possibility to assess the dose and/or dose rate in real time is particularly interesting in interventional radiology and cardiology (IR/IC) since operators can receive relatively high doses while standing close to the primary radiation field.A study concerning the optimization of the use of APDs in IR/IC was performed in the framework of the ORAMED project, a Collaborative Project (2008-2011) supported by the European Commission within its 7th Framework Program. This paper reports on tests performed with APDs on phantoms using an X-ray facility in a hospital environment and APDs worn by interventionalists during routine practice in different European hospitals.The behaviour of the APDs is more satisfactory in hospitals than in laboratories with respect to the influence of the tube peak high voltage and pulse width, because the APDs are tested in scattered fields with dose equivalent rates generally lower than 1 Sv.h(-1).

Use of active personal dosemeters in interventional radiology and cardiology: Tests in laboratory conditions and recommendations - ORAMED project

Active personal dosemeters (APD) have been found to be very efficient tools to reduce occupational doses in many applications of ionizing radiation. In order to be used in interventional radiology and cardiology (IR/IC), APDs should be able to measure low energy photons and pulsed radiation with relatively high instantaneous personal dose equivalent rates. A study concerning the optimization of the use of APDs in IR/IC was performed in the framework of the ORAMED project, a Collaborative Project (2008-2011) supported by the European Commission within its 7th Framework Program. In particular, eight commercial APDs were tested in continuous and pulsed X-ray fields delivered by calibration laboratories in order to evaluate their performances. Most of APDs provide a response in pulsed mode more or less affected by the personal dose equivalent rate, which means they could be used in routine monitoring provided that correction factors are introduced. These results emphasize the importance of adding tests in pulsed mode in type-test procedures for APDs. Some general recommendations are proposed in the end of this paper for the selection and use of APDs at IR/IC workplaces.

Eye lens monitoring for interventional radiology personnel: dosemeters, calibration and practical aspects of H p (3) monitoring. A 2015 review.

A thorough literature review about the current situation on the implementation of eye lens monitoring has been performed in order to provide recommendations regarding dosemeter types, calibration procedures and practical aspects of eye lens monitoring for interventional radiology personnel. Most relevant data and recommendations from about 100 papers have been analysed and classified in the following topics: challenges of today in eye lens monitoring; conversion coefficients, phantoms and calibration procedures for eye lens dose evaluation; correction factors and dosemeters for eye lens dose measurements; dosemeter position and influence of protective devices. The major findings of the review can be summarised as follows: the recommended operational quantity for the eye lens monitoring is H p (3). At present, several dosemeters are available for eye lens monitoring and calibration procedures are being developed. However, in practice, very often, alternative methods are used to assess the dose to the eye lens. A summary of correction factors found in the literature for the assessment of the eye lens dose is provided. These factors can give an estimation of the eye lens dose when alternative methods, such as the use of a whole body dosemeter, are used. A wide range of values is found, thus indicating the large uncertainty associated with these simplified methods. Reduction factors from most common protective devices obtained experimentally and using Monte Carlo calculations are presented. The paper concludes that the use of a dosemeter placed at collar level outside the lead apron can provide a useful first estimate of the eye lens exposure. However, for workplaces with estimated annual equivalent dose to the eye lens close to the dose limit, specific eye lens monitoring should be performed. Finally, training of the involved medical staff on the risks of ionising radiation for the eye lens and on the correct use of protective systems is strongly recommended.

Staff eye lens and extremity exposure in interventional cardiology: Results of the ORAMED project

Within the ORAMED project a coordinated measurement program for occupationally exposed medical staff was performed in different hospitals in Europe. The main objectives of ORAMED were to obtain a set of standardized data on doses for staff in interventional cardiology and radiology and to optimize staff protection. Doses were measured with thermoluminescent dosemeters on the ring finger and wrist of both hands, on legs and at the level of the eyes of the main operator performing interventional procedures. In this paper an overview of the doses per procedure measured during 646 interventional cardiology procedures is given for cardiac angiographies and angioplasties (CA/PTCA), radiofrequency ablations (RFA) and pacemaker and defibrillator implantations (PM/ICD). 31% of the monitored procedures were associated with no collective protective equipment, whereas 44% involved a ceiling screen and a table curtain. Although associated with the smallest air kerma - area product (KAP), PM/ICD procedures led to the highest doses. As expected, KAP and doses values exhibited a very large variability. The left side of the operator, most frequently the closest to the X-ray scattering region, was more exposed than his right side. An analysis of the effect of parameters influencing the doses, namely collective protective equipment, X-ray tube configuration and catheter access route, was performed on the doses normalized to KAP. Ceiling screen and table curtain were observed to reduce normalized doses by atmost a factor 4, much smaller than theoretical attenuation factors typical for such protections, i.e. from 10 to 100. This observation was understood as their inappropriate use by the operators and their non-optimized design. Configurations with tube above the patient led to higher normalized doses to the operator than tube below, but the effect of using a biplane X-ray suite was more complex to analyze. For CA/PTCA procedures, the upper part of the operator's body received higher normalized doses for radial than for femoral catheter access, by atmost a factor 5. This could be seen for cases with no collective protection. The eyes were observed to receive the maximum fraction of the annual dose limit almost as frequently as legs and hands, and clearly the most frequently, if the former 150 mSv and new 20 mSv recommended limits for the lens of the eye are considered, respectively.

Status of eye lens radiation dose monitoring in European hospitals.

A questionnaire was developed by the members of WG12 of EURADOS in order to establish an overview of the current status of eye lens radiation dose monitoring in hospitals. The questionnaire was sent to medical physicists and radiation protection officers in hospitals across Europe. Specific topics were addressed in the questionnaire such as: knowledge of the proposed eye lens dose limit; monitoring and dosimetry issues; training and radiation protection measures. The results of the survey highlighted that the new eye lens dose limit can be exceeded in interventional radiology procedures and that eye lens protection is crucial. Personnel should be properly trained in how to use protective equipment in order to keep eye lens doses as low as reasonably achievable. Finally, the results also highlighted the need to improve the design of eye dosemeters in order to ensure satisfactory use by workers.

Recommendations to reduce hand exposure for standard nuclear medicine procedures

The optimization of the extremity dosimetry of medical staff in nuclear medicine was the aim of the Work Package 4 (WP4) of the ORAMED project, a Collaborative Project (2008-2011) supported by the European Commission within its 7th Framework Programme. Hand doses and dose distributions across the hands of medical staff working in nuclear medicine departments were evaluated through an extensive measurement program involving 32 hospitals in Europe and 139 monitored workers. The study included the most frequently used radionuclides, (99m)Tc- and (18)F-labelled radiopharmaceuticals for diagnostic and (90)Y-labelled Zevalin (R) and DOTATOC for therapy. Furthermore, Monte Carlo simulations were performed in different predefined scenarios to evaluate separately the efficacy of different radiation protection measures by comparing hand dose distributions according to various parameters. The present work gives recommendations based on results obtained with both measurements and simulations. This results in nine practical recommendations regarding the positioning of the dosemeters for an appropriate skin dose monitoring and the best protection means to reduce the personnel exposure.

Recommendations to reduce extremity and eye lens doses in interventional radiology and cardiology

The main aim of the Work Package 1 (WP1) of the ORAMED project, Collaborative Project (2008-2011), supported by the European Commission within its 7th Framework Programme, was to obtain a set of standardized data on extremity and eye lens doses for staff in interventional radiology and cardiology (IR/IC) workplaces and to recommend a series of guidelines on radiation protection in order to both guarantee and optimize staff protection. Within the project, coordinated measurements were performed in 34 hospitals in 6 European countries. Furthermore, simulations of the most representative workplaces in IR and IC were performed to determine the main parameters that influence the extremity and eye lens doses. The work presented in this paper shows the recommendations that were formulated by the results obtained from both measurements and simulations. The presented guidelines are directed to operators, assistant personnel, radiation protection officers and medical physics experts. They concern radiation protection issues, such as the use of room protective equipment, as well as the positioning of the extremity and eye lens dosemeters for routine monitoring.