The Evolving Role of the Medical Radiation Safety Officer.

The field of medicine has been rapidly changing recently for providers and patients. This article considers how such changes have impacted the roles and responsibilities of the medical facility radiation safety officer. To supplement the personal experiences of the authors, a questionnaire soliciting voluntary feedback was submitted to a group of medical radiation safety officers. Several common themes emerged in the responses received, confirming that the role of the medical radiation safety officer has indeed changed concurrent with the changes occurring in medicine, frequently due to changing regulations and accreditation requirements in response to new and novel imaging and treatment modalities. Today's medical radiation safety officer faces some daunting challenges, including limited staffing, incorporation of numerous accreditation standards, and maintenance of effective communication with administrators and other personnel. Nonetheless, respondents indicate that they have tremendous job satisfaction and embrace the changing landscape. Shared challenges and changes are discussed herein to provide readers with a perspective on the life of a medical center radiation safety officer.

Health Physics Society Comments to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Reform Task Force.

The Health Physics Society (HPS) provided comment to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on options to consider when developing an action plan for President Trump's Executive Order to evaluate regulations for repeal, replacement, or modification. The HPS recommended that the EPA reconsider their adherence to the linear no-threshold (LNT) model for radiation risk calculations and improve several documents by better addressing uncertainties in low-dose, low dose-rate (LDDR) radiation exposure environments. The authors point out that use of the LNT model near background levels cannot provide reliable risk projections, use of the LNT model and collective-dose calculations in some EPA documents is inconsistent with the recommendations of international organizations, and some EPA documents have not been exposed to the public comment rule-making process. To assist in establishing a better scientific basis for the risks of low dose rate and low dose radiation exposure, the EPA should continue to support the "Million Worker Study," led by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement.

Physician Knowledge of Radiation Exposure and Risk in Medical Imaging.

PURPOSE: Medical imaging is an increasingly important source of radiation exposure for the general population, and there are risks associated with such exposure; however, recent studies have demonstrated poor understanding of medical radiation among various groups of health care providers. This study had two aims: (1) analyze physicians' knowledge of radiation exposure and risk in diagnostic imaging across multiple specialties and levels of training, and (2) assess the effectiveness of a brief educational presentation on improving physicians' knowledge. METHODS: From 2014 to 2016, 232 health care providers from multiple departments participated in an educational presentation and pre- and postpresentation tests evaluating knowledge of radiation exposure and risk at a large academic institution. RESULTS: Knowledge of radiation exposure and risk was relatively low on the prepresentation test, including particularly poor understanding of different imaging modalities, with 26% of participants unable to correctly identify which modalities expose patients to ionizing radiation. Test scores significantly increased after the educational presentation. Radiologists had higher prepresentation test scores than other specialties, and therefore less opportunity for improvement, but also demonstrated improvement in radiation safety knowledge after education. Aside from radiology, there was no significant difference in initial knowledge of radiation exposure and risk among the other specialties. CONCLUSIONS: Providers' knowledge of radiation exposure and risk was low at baseline but significantly increased after a brief educational presentation. Efforts to educate ordering providers about radiation exposure and risk are needed to ensure that providers are appropriately weighing the risks and benefits of medical imaging and to ensure high-quality, patient-centered care.

Pregnancy and the working interventional radiologist.

The prevalence of women radiologists has risen in the past decade, but this rise is not reflected in interventional radiology. Women are grossly underrepresented, and this may be partly due to fear of radiation exposure, particularly during pregnancy. The simple fact is radiation exposure is minimal and the concern regarding the health of the developing fetus is unjustly aggrandized. Fully understanding the risks may help women to choose interventional radiology and practicing women interventionalists to stay productive during their child-bearing years. To date, little has been published to guide women who may become pregnant during their training and career.

Skyshine radiation resulting from 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams from a medical accelerator.

Skyshine radiation scattered in the atmosphere above a radiation therapy accelerator facility can result in measurable dose rates at locations near the facility on the ground and at roof level. A Reuter Stokes RSS-120 pressurized ion chamber was used to measure exposure rates in the vicinity of a Varian Trilogy Linear Accelerator at the Colorado State University Veterinary Medical Center. The linear accelerator was used to deliver bremsstrahlung photons from 6 MeV and 10 MeV electron beams with several combinations of field sizes and gantry angles. An equation for modeling skyshine radiation in the vicinity of medical accelerators was published by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements in 2005. However, this model did not provide a good fit to the observed dose rates at ground level or on the roof. A more accurate method of estimating skyshine may be to measure the exposure rate of the radiation exiting the roof of the facility and to scale the results using the graphs presented in this paper.