Implications of the implementation of the revised dose limit to the lens of the eye: the view of IRPA professionals.

In April 2011, the International Commission on Radiological Protection issued a statement on reduction of the equivalent dose limits for the lens of the eye, and strongly recommended its consideration in the revision of the International Atomic Energy Agency's International Basic Safety Standards on Radiation Protection. The reduced dose limit was incorporated in the final version of the Basic Safety Standards. As significant concern was expressed by radiation protection professionals worldwide, the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) established a task group to assess the impact of implementation of the revised dose limit for the lens of the eye for occupational exposure. IRPA Associate Societies (ASs) were asked for their views using a questionnaire addressing three topics: implications for dosimetry, implications for methods of protection, and wider implications. The responses received indicate various methods of approach and express different points of view, reflecting nuances of particular ASs or specific professional groups. Topic experts nominated by ASs were selected to assist with collation of responses, and a report was produced by the task group. Conclusions were drawn on the three issues, including potential cost implications. A number of recommendations were drawn from the responses received including: the request for more understanding about the relationship between exposure of the lens of the eye and cataract formation, and further guidance to assist implementation; the importance of economic and social considerations when introducing the limits into national regulations; the need to propose or define procedures related to employment of people with existing or pre-cataract conditions; and the practical aspects relating to dosimetry and protective equipment.

Implications in dosimetry of the implementation of the revised dose limit to the lens of the eye.

In 2012, International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) established a Task Group to provide an assessment of the impact of the implementation of the ICRP-revised dose limit for the lens of the eye for occupational exposure. Associated Societies (ASs) of IRPA were asked to provide views and comments on the basis of a questionnaire addressing three principal topics: (i) implications for dosimetry, (ii) implications for methods of protection and (iii) wider implications of implementing the revised limits. A summary of the collated responses regarding dosimetry is presented and discussed. There is large agreement on the most critical aspects and difficulties in setting up an appropriate monitoring programme for the lens of the eyes. The recent international standards and technical documents provide guidance for some of the concerns but other challenges remain in terms of awareness, acceptance and practicalities.

Requirements relating to radon in the International Basic Safety Standards: information, measurement and national strategies.

The fifth edition of the International Basic Safety Standards (BSS) has recently been established as Part 3 of the General Safety Requirements of the IAEA Safety Standards Series. The BSS applies to all exposure situations and to all categories of exposure. As such, the BSS addresses both occupational exposure due to radon in workplaces and public exposure due to radon in dwellings. In workplaces, exposure due to radon is treated either as a planned exposure situation or as an existing exposure situation, depending on the circumstances. With regard to exposure due to radon in dwellings, the BSS requires that general information on radon, including information on health risks and the synergy with smoking, be made available to the public and other interested parties. Countries are also required to determine whether an action plan for controlling exposure due to radon indoors is necessary, and, if so, to establish and implement such an action plan. Guidance material, covering the establishment of reference levels, national and regional radon surveys, identification of radon prone areas, building codes for new buildings, corrective actions for existing buildings, information campaigns and programme evaluation and effectiveness is currently being developed.

Justification of diagnostic medical exposures: some practical issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation.

OBJECTIVES: The Radiation Protection of Patients Unit of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is concerned about the effectiveness of justification of diagnostic medical exposures. Recent published work and the report of an initial IAEA consultation in the area gave grounds for such concerns. There is a significant level of inappropriate usage, and, in some cases, a poor level of awareness of dose and risk among some key groups involved. This article aims to address this. METHODS: The IAEA convened a second group of experts in November 2008 to review practical and achievable actions that might lead to more effective justification. RESULTS: This report summarises the matters that this group considered and the outcome of their deliberations. There is a need for improved communication, both within professions and between professionals on one hand, and between professionals and the patients/public on the other. Coupled with this, the issue of consent to imaging procedures was revisited. The need for good evidence-based referral guidelines or criteria of acceptability was emphasised, as was the need for their global adaptation and dissemination. CONCLUSION: Clinical audit was regarded as a key tool in ensuring that justification becomes an effective, transparent and accountable part of normal radiological practice. In summary, justification would be facilitated by the "3 As": awareness, appropriateness and audit.

Occupational exposures worldwide and revision of international standards for protection.

United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) has become the world authority on the levels and effects of ionising radiation. Since 1975, UNSCEAR has evaluated inter alia the level of occupational exposure worldwide. Based on revised questionnaires, more detailed information is now available. The results of the last evaluation (1995-2002) will be shown in the paper. Lessons learned from the responses by UN Member States will be given, as well as an outline of plans for data collection in future cycles. The requirements for protection against exposure to ionising radiation of workers, the public and patients are established in the International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionising Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources (BSS), published in 1996. As a result of a review of the BSS in 2006, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) started a process for the revision of these standards in 2007. International organisations including the joint sponsoring organisations of the BSS-IAEA, FAO, ILO, OECD/NEA, PAHO and WHO--as well as potential new joint sponsoring organisations of the revised BSS--the European Commission and UNEP-were involved from the beginning in the revision process. The paper also provides a summary of the status of the Draft Revised BSS and describes the new format. The paper focuses, in particular, on requirements for the protection of workers as well as recordkeeping requirements, which provide the legal basis for the collection of specific data; these data are of the type that can be used by UNSCEAR.

International project on individual monitoring and radiation exposure levels in interventional cardiology.

Within the Information System on Occupational Exposure in Medicine, Industry and Research (ISEMIR), a new International Atomic Energy Agency initiative, a Working Group on interventional cardiology, aims to assess staff radiation protection (RP) levels and to propose an international database of occupational exposures. A survey of regulatory bodies (RBs) has provided information at the country level on RP practice in interventional cardiology (IC). Concerning requirements for wearing personal dosemeters, only 57 % of the RB specifies the number and position of dosemeters for staff monitoring. Less than 40 % of the RBs could provide occupational doses. Reported annual median effective dose values (often <0.5 mSv) were lower than expected considering validated data from facility-specific studies, indicating that compliance with continuous individual monitoring is often not achieved in IC. A true assessment of annual personnel doses in IC will never be realised unless a knowledge of monitoring compliance is incorporated into the analysis.

Official dosimetry with personal electronic dosemeters--the framework in Germany.

In Germany, personal electronic dosemeters (AEPDs) are presently applied mainly for operational radiation protection monitoring particularly in nuclear power engineering companies, large hospitals and research centres. This is done in addition to the official dosimetry of record. Therefore, frequently, double monitoring occurs-officially and operationally. A crucial advantage of AEPDs compared with passive dosemeters is the ability to adapt the monitoring period to the working time in controlled areas and to allow an immediate readout of the dose after leaving the controlled area, e.g. a job-related monitoring is possible by correlating the readout dose with the job performed. Germany started a general research project, consisting of two parts, for an optimised implementation of personal electronic dosemeters into official dosimetry. The use of AEPDs as official dosemeters depends on an approval by Federal and Federal State ('Länder') authorities as an official dosimetry system, which has to comply with special requirements ensuring that the legal requirements are fulfilled. The formulation of these special requirements is in the focus of part one of the research project, supervised by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) and performed by the Gesellschaft für Anlagen- und Reaktorsicherheit (GRS) mbH. As a result of part one, a framework was developed which is the basis for a future technical implementation project. Part one is described in the paper, while part two is still to be initiated and will deal with the implementation and testing phase of the introduction of personal electronic dosemeters as official dosemeters.

Childhood cancer and residential radon exposure - results of a population-based case-control study in Lower Saxony (Germany).

A population-based case-control study on risk factors for childhood malignancies was used to investigate a previously reported association between elevated indoor radon concentrations and childhood cancer, with special regard to leukaemia. The patients were all children suffering from leukaemia and common solid tumours (nephroblastoma, neuroblastoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, central nervous system (CNS) tumours) diagnosed between July 1988 and June 1993 in Lower Saxony (Germany) and aged less than 15 years. Two population-based control groups were matched by age and gender to the leukaemia patients. Long-term (1 year) radon measurements were performed in those homes where the children had been living for at least 1 year, with particular attention being paid to those rooms where they had stayed most of the time. Due to the sequential study design, radon measurements in these rooms could only be done for 36% (82 leukaemias, 82 solid tumours and 209 controls) of the 1038 families initially contacted. Overall mean indoor radon concentrations (27 Bq m(-3)) were low compared with the measured levels in other studies. Using a prespecified cutpoint of 70 Bq m(-3), no association with indoor radon concentrations was seen for the leukaemias (odds ratio (OR): 1.30; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.32-5.33); however, the risk estimates were elevated for the solid tumours (OR: 2.61; 95% CI: 0.96-7.13), mainly based on 6 CNS tumours. We did not find any evidence for an association between indoor radon and childhood leukaemia, which is in line with a recently published American case-control study. There is little support for an association with CNS tumours in the literature.