Estudo da resposta de um dosímetro eletrónico individual

Introdução – A monitorização da exposição ocupacional a doses de radiação ionizante pode ser complementada por dosímetros eletrónicos individuais que permitem uma leitura direta da dose de radiação recebida. Dada a dependência energética e de débito de dose já reportada para estes dosímetros, este trabalho pretende determinar a linearidade da resposta de um dosímetro eletrónico individual e estudar o comportamento da sua resposta em função da energia de radiação e do débito de dose. Metodologia – Para estudar a dependência da energia da radiação do dosímetro eletrónico pessoal Vertec Bleeper Sv procedeu‑se à sua irradiação com um equivalente de dose individual, Hp(10), de 500 μSv de radiação gama do Cobalto – 60 (60C) e Césio – 137 (137Cs) e das qualidades de radiação X da série Narrow (N): N‑30, N‑40, N‑60, N‑80, N‑100 e N‑120. Para investigar a dependência da resposta em função do débito de dose aplicaram‑se à ampola de raios X as intensidades de corrente elétrica de 1 mA, 5 mA, 10 mA, 15 mA e 20 mA. Resultados – Não existe uma relação entre a resposta do detetor e a energia de radiação a que este é exposto. Ocorre uma subestimação superior a 50% na grandeza medida para energias inferiores a 33 keV, mas ostenta uma medida relativamente linear da grandeza Hp(10) para doses inferiores a 100 μSv. Também se constata que, à medida que o débito de dose aumenta, existe uma diminuição na resposta do dosímetro. O menor decréscimo na resposta deste dosímetro eletrónico individual dá‑se para as qualidades de radiação N‑30 (1,1%), N‑40 (4,1%) e N‑120 (20,0%). Conclusão – Verifica‑se que a resposta do dosímetro individual Vertec Bleeper Sv depende fortemente da energia da radiação e do débito de dose. ABSTRACT: Introduction – The measurement of occupational exposure to radiation doses can be completed with an electronic personal dosemeter that allows a direct reading and alarm function of the received radiation dose. Due to the energy and dose rate dependence already reported for this type of dosemeter, it is intended, with this work, to determine the response linearity of an Electronic Personal Dosemeter and to study its response behavior to the dose rate and radiation energy. Methodology – The electronic personal dosemeter Vertec Bleeper Sv energy dependency was evaluated by its irradiation with 500 μSv from the radionuclides Cobalt – 60 (60C) and Cesium – 137 (137Cs) as well as by the radiation qualities of the Narrow (N) series: N‑30, N‑40, N‑60, N‑80, N‑100 e N‑120. To investigate the dose rate dependency, the intensities of electric current of 1 mA, 5 mA, 10 mA, 15 mA and 20 mA were applied to the X‑ray tube. Results – There is no relationship between the response of the detector and the radiation energy. For energies below 33 keV there is an underestimation over 50% of the radiation dose measured but the detector presents a linear response for energies under 100 μSv. A dependency on the dose rate is perceived since as the dose rate increases, the response of the individual monitor decreases. There is a smaller decrease for the radiation qualities of N‑30 (1.1%), N‑40 (4.1%) and N‑120 (20.0%). Conclusion – It is concluded that there is a strong dependence of radiation energy and dose rate on the response of an electronic personal dosemeter.

Hand exposure in diagnostic nuclear medicine with 18F- and 99mTc-labelled radiopharmaceuticals - Results of the ORAMED project

Workers performing preparation and administration of radiopharmaceuticals in NM departments are likely to receive high local skin doses to the hands which may even surpass the dose limit of 500 mSv whenever radiation protection standards are insufficient. A large measurement campaign was organised within the framework of the ORAMED project to determine the dose distribution across the hands received during preparation and administration of 18F- and 99mTc-labelled radiopharmaceuticals. The final data, collected over almost 3 years, include 641 measurements from 96 workers in 30 NM departments from 6 European countries. Results have provided levels of reference doses for the considered standard NM diagnostic procedures (mean maximum normalised skin dose of 230 μSv/GBq, 430 μSv/GBq, 930 μSv/GBq and 1200 μSv/GBq for the administration of 99mTc, preparation of 99mTc, administration of 18F and preparation of 18F, respectively). Finger dose was analysed as a function of the potential parameters of influence showing that shielding is the most efficient means of radiation protection to reduce skin dose. An appropriate method for routine monitoring of the extremities is also proposed: the base of the index finger of the non-dominant hand is a suitable position to place the ring dosemeter, with its sensitive part oriented towards the palm side; its reading may be multiplied by a factor of 6 to estimate the maximum local skin dose. Finally, results were compared to earlier published data, which correspond mostly to individual works with a reduced number of workers and measurements.

Extremity exposure in nuclear medicine: preliminary results of a European study.

The Work Package 4 of the ORAMED project, a collaborative project (2008-11) supported by the European Commission within its seventh Framework Programme, is concerned with the optimisation of the extremity dosimetry of medical staff in nuclear medicine. To evaluate the extremity doses and dose distributions across the hands of medical staff working in nuclear medicine departments, an extensive measurement programme has been started in 32 nuclear medicine departments in Europe. This was done using a standard protocol recording all relevant information for radiation exposure, i.e. radiation protection devices and tools. This study shows the preliminary results obtained for this measurement campaign. For diagnostic purposes, the two most-used radionuclides were considered: (99m)Tc and (18)F. For therapeutic treatments, Zevalin(®) and DOTATOC (both labelled with (90)Y) were chosen. Large variations of doses were observed across the hands depending on different parameters. Furthermore, this study highlights the importance of the positioning of the extremity dosemeter for a correct estimate of the maximum skin doses.

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.