Bonn call for action and the unfinished task of radiation protection of children and adolescents in low and middle-income countries: A focus on Sub-Saharan Africa

ObjectivesThe Bonn call for action, with the theme: “Setting the scene for the next decade,” was declared over nine years ago to strengthen radiation protection in medicine. This study reviews key actions and activities related to radiation protection of children and adolescents consistent with the Bonn call for action in sub-Saharan Africa to highlight progress and identify existing gaps.Key findingsA lot has happened since the declaration of the Bonn call-for-action such as a follow-up conference in 2017 on achieving change in the practice of radiation protection. However, there exists a huge gap that needs to be filled in the radiation protection of children and adolescents in low and middle-income countries particularly sub-Saharan Africa, where limited resources in health compete with radiation protection demands. Some of the gaps that remain are the apparent lack of implementation of the use of referral guidelines and establishment of national and regional diagnostic reference levels for paediatric imaging among others.ConclusionSeveral strides have been achieved on a global scale for the Bonn call for action, ranging from the justification of medical exposures to the current drive for radiation safety culture in medical imaging. However, several unmet needs for radiation protection for children and adolescents remain such as implementation of referral guidelines for justification and paediatric diagnostic reference levels.Implications for practiceStep up actions and close collaboration is required to strengthen the practice of paediatric radiation protection in low and middle-income countries because children account for a greater proportion of the population and are vulnerable to the negative effects of radiation like possible cancer induction.     

Large differences in education and training of radiographers in Europe and Central Asia: Results from an IAEA coordinated study

IntroductionEducation and training of radiographers is known to be diverse between countries and regions. Under an IAEA project, this work collected data on radiographer education for the Europe and Central Asia region with a particular focus on radiation protection gaps and potential actions.MethodsFollowing piloting, an electronic questionnaire was distributed to all national counterparts for the IAEA Technial Coopearation (TC) Europe region (n = 33 countries) and nominated national representatives. Contacts were additionally invited to a virtual workshop to discuss and rank common problems in education and training of radiographers and to propose potential solutions.ResultsResponses were received from 31 countries, including 14 from the European Union. Just over half of countries reported radiographer education being in higher education with 71% having program durations more than 3 years (range: 1 month-4 years). Programs included a spectrum of both clinical training and radiation protection hours with ten-fold variations noted across the region. Inclusion of core radiation protection topics within curricula varied similarly, as did radiographers’ clinical involvement in both justification and optimisation between countries. Workshop participants identified five common training problems, namely education availability, lack of standardisation, radiation protection course quality, teamwork problems and lack of equipment.ConclusionRadiographer education in the IAEA Europe region is heterogeneous with substantial differences in duration and quality of training programs between countries, which likely impact on quality of patient care delivered. Common problems have been identified and potential solutions proposed to focus quality improvement initiatives.Implications for practiceRadiographer education and training is diverse throughout the IAEA TC Europe region, with likely impacts on radiation protection practices applied. Clinical involvement of radiographers in justification and optimisation differs, potentially limiting adherence to radiation protection principles.     

Biological basis of radiation protection needs rejuvenation

Abstract

Purpose: Human beings encounter radiation in many different situations – from proximity to radioactive waste sites to participation in medical procedures using X-rays etc. Limits for radiation exposures are legally regulated; however, current radiation protection policy does not explicitly acknowledge that biological, cellular and molecular effects of low doses and low dose rates of radiation differ from effects induced by medium and high dose radiation exposures. Recent technical developments in biology and medicine, from single cell techniques to big data computational research, have enabled new approaches for study of biology of low doses of radiation. Results of the work done so far support the idea that low doses of radiation have effects that differ from those associated with high dose exposures; this work, however, is far from sufficient for the development of a new theoretical framework needed for the understanding of low dose radiation exposures.

Conclusions: Mechanistic understanding of radiation effects at low doses is necessary in order to develop better radiation protection policy.     

The impact of educational interventions on clinicians’ knowledge of radiation protection: An integrative review

ObjectivesThe aim of this review is to explore the impact of educational interventions on clinicians’ knowledge of radiation protection.Key findingsFollowing a comprehensive search of MEDLINE and EMBASE from 2000 to 2018, 1795 studies were identified, eight of which met the criteria for this review. All eight studies utilised pretest-posttest designs and involved the education of medical students or doctors. All studies reported an increase in participants’ knowledge of radiation protection, five of which were statistically significant. In two studies, over half of participants stated that education received would impact on their future imaging requesting practice.ConclusionWhilst a range of educational interventions have been shown to improve knowledge of radiation protection, there was wide variation in the study settings and type of educational programmes delivered. No studies assessed long-term knowledge retention or the impact on clinical practice. Therefore, robust research is needed to accurately measure the impact of educational programmes on knowledge of radiation protection in the UK and the implications this may have on referral practices.Implications for practiceThis review revealed that educational interventions are effective in increasing participants' knowledge levels of radiation protection. It is necessary to assess and ensure that this improvement in knowledge actually translates into an impact on referral practice/behaviour. The ideal outcome being that fewer unnecessary examinations are requested and our patients are protected from a needless increased radiation burden.     

Are radiographers an influencing factor in the radiation protection practices of speech-language therapists performing videofluoroscopic swallowing studies?

IntroductionA videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) is a fluoroscopic examination conducted by radiographers and speech-language therapists (SLTs) to assess dysphagia. Given the potential of SLTs to feed patients during the procedure, they may be exposed to radiation. The research aimed to assess radiation protection practices utilised by SLTs to determine if radiographers have a role in providing ongoing practical education.MethodsAn online questionnaire was distributed to SLTs from six countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and United States of America). Responses were analysed quantitatively using frequencies and chi-square analysis (p = 0.05) and supported by written comments.ResultsA total of 224 responses were analysed. Thyroid shields (94%) were used more frequently than full aprons (72%). Differences (p < 0.0001) were seen between Australian and USA participants regarding the use and position of radiation monitors; 43% of Australian participants stating they always used a monitor, compared to 75% of USA participants. Nearly all Australian SLTs wore monitors under shielding (92%) and at waist level (69%), while USA participants reported wearing them outside shielding (97%) and at thyroid level (94%). Participants’ radiation practice was influenced primarily by other SLTs (64%), followed by radiographers (57%). However, written comments revealed the significance of the radiographer in providing training as “radiographers are excellent at ensuring we [use] right equipment, stand in the right places and use exposure monitoring”.ConclusionSLTs did not always adopt the ICRP principle of shielding and there were inconsistencies with regards to the use and placement of radiation monitors. Radiographers are well positioned to provide advice with regards to safe practice.Implications for practiceOpportunities to enhance radiation protection practices are evident, as is the advising role of radiographers.     

Ionising radiation risk disclosure: When should radiographers assume a duty to inform?

IntroductionAutonomy is a fundamental patient right for ethical practice, and informed consent is the mechanism by which health care professionals ensure this right has been respected. The ethical notion of informed consent has evolved alongside legal developments. Under Australian law, a provider who fails to disclose risk may be found to be in breach of a duty of disclosure, potentially facing legal consequences if the patient experiences harm that is attributable to an undisclosed risk. These consequences may include the common law tort of negligence.Ionising radiation, in the form of a medical imaging examination, has the potential to cause harm. However, stochastic effects cannot be attributable to a specific ionising radiation event. What then is the role of the Australian medical imaging service provider in disclosing ionising radiation risk?MethodsThe ethical and legal principles of informed consent, and the duty of information provision to the patient are investigated. These general principles are then applied to the specific and unusual case of ionising radiation, and what responsibilities apply to the medical imaging provider. Finally, the legal, professional and ethical duties of the radiographer to disclose information to their patients are investigated.ResultsAustralian law is unclear as to whether a radiographer has a common law responsibility to disclose radiation risk. There is ambiguity as to whether stochastic ionising radiation risk could be considered a legal disclosure responsibility.ConclusionWhile it is unlikely that not disclosing risk will have medicolegal consequences, doing so represents sound ethical practice.     

多层CT辐射剂量与防护研究进展

多层CT(MDCT)可进行快速扫描和大范围容积扫描。与单层CT(SDCT)相比,MDCT特有的参数可能增加或减少受检者剂量。早期研究表明MDCT所致受检者剂量高于SDCT,但目前越来越多的研究表明两者剂量相似甚至MDCT的剂量较低。多层CT主要依靠CT的合理使用来降低辐射剂量。CT检查正当化判断是临床医生与放射医师共同的责任。扫描参数应根据扫描指征、受检者体形、年龄及扫描范围设置,并使用自动曝光控制等降低辐射剂量的技术。对临床医生和CT工作人员进行CT辐射防护培训有助于CT检查正当化及扫描方案与辐射剂量的最优化。     

Sample size justifications in Gait & Posture

BackgroundContext regarding how researchers determine the sample size of their experiments is important for interpreting the results and determining their value and meaning. Between 2018 and 2019, the journal Gait & Posture introduced a requirement for sample size justification in their author guidelines.Research QuestionHow frequently and in what ways are sample sizes justified in Gait & Posture research articles and was the inclusion of a guideline requiring sample size justification associated with a change in practice?MethodsThe guideline was not in place prior to May 2018 and was in place from 25th July 2019. All articles in the three most recent volumes of the journal (84−86) and the three most recent, pre-guideline volumes (60−62) at time of preregistration were included in this analysis. This provided an initial sample of 324 articles (176 pre-guideline and 148 post-guideline). Articles were screened by two authors to extract author data, article metadata and sample size justification data. Specifically, screeners identified if (yes or no) and how sample sizes were justified. Six potential justification types (Measure Entire Population, Resource Constraints, Accuracy, A priori Power Analysis, Heuristics, No Justification) and an additional option of Other/Unsure/Unclear were used.ResultsIn most cases, authors of Gait & Posture articles did not provide a justification for their study’s sample size. The inclusion of the guideline was associated with a modest increase in the percentage of articles providing a justification (16.6–28.1%). A priori power calculations were the dominant type of justification, but many were not reported in enough detail to allow replication.SignificanceGait & Posture researchers should be more transparent in how they determine their sample sizes and carefully consider if they are suitable. Editors and journals may consider adding a similar guideline as a low-resource way to improve sample size justification reporting.     

Reduction of radiation doses to staff during diagnostic X–ray procedure

Radiation protection is assured by respecting three general principles which are: the justification of the practice; the optimisation of the protection; and the individual dose limits. The justification of the practice is due to the fact that exposure to ionising radiation has deleterious effects on health. The principle of optimisation is introduced since some of these effects are considered as non-threshold ones, and thus one has to reduce exposure to levels as low as reasonably achievable (i.e. ALARA principle). The principle of individual limits is introduced as a safeguard to prevent situations where the respect of the two first principles would not be sufficient to protect individuals. The first objective of this contribution is to state the dose limits for exposure of diagnostic imaging personnel and explain the reasons for allowing a larger dose equivalent for radiation workers than for the general population. The second objective is to present various methods and devices that may be used to reduce personnel exposure during diagnostic X-ray examinations (especially interventional fluoroscopic procedures). A judicious application of radiation protection techniques, such as the limitation of patient exposure, the increase of the distance from the source of scatter, and shielding, will significantly reduce personnel exposure.     

Assessment of the awareness of radiation protection and related concepts among nursing staff mainly working in diagnostic imaging units,cath-labs and operation theatres in Sri Lanka: A survey-based study

IntroductionThis study was carried out to evaluate the awareness of radiation protection, radiation types, medical imaging equipment and radiation effects among nurses for the first time in Sri Lanka. Since nurses are involved as direct caregivers in diagnostic and therapeutic radiography and radiation treatment procedures, they need to have a good understanding of the areas mentioned above.MethodsA self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 391 nurses working in hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare settings. Forwarded questions gathered the participants' demographic details and assessed their awareness of radiation protection, medical imaging equipment, radiation type and radiation effects. The average score per awareness area for each demographic characteristic was calculated based on the responses. Additionally, the percentage of participants who scored above 50 and 75 was calculated for each awareness area.ResultsThe majority were female participants (81.1%) and possessed a diploma in nursing (66.0%) with 10.8 years of average work experience. 92.3%, 74.7%, 69.8% and 22.3% of the participants scored more than 50 marks for the questions related to radiation protection, medical imaging equipment, radiation type and radiation effects, respectively. The level of nursing education and prior training in radiation protection significantly influenced all awareness areas, whereas participants with a graduate qualification in nursing and with prior radiation protection training scored the highest average marks.ConclusionBased on the scores obtained, the Sri Lankan nurses have satisfactory awareness of the essential concepts related to radiation types, medical imaging equipment and radiation protection. However, there is a significant lacking of awareness of radiation effects. This can be attributed to the fact that most participants did not have any formal training in radiation protection. The results implicate that proper training in radiation protection can significantly influence awareness of radiation protection and related concepts. Therefore, it is a timely requirement to initiate short awareness programs and continuing education programs on radiation protection for nurses working in specialised radiation units.Implications for practiceThe study suggests the necessity of initiating continuous education programs for nursing staff radiation protection to overcome the awareness gaps.     

无锡市2020年度放射诊疗资源及医疗照射应用频度调查

目的 调查无锡市放射诊疗资源配置、分布及医疗照射应用频度,为合理调配医疗资源,规范医疗照射管理提供依据。方法 根据"江苏省放射卫生信息管理平台"2020年度监测数据,结合无锡市统计年鉴提供的2019年底无锡市常住人口,对无锡市放射诊疗机构的人员、设备、医疗照射应用频度进行描述性分析。结果 2020年无锡市的放射诊疗设备923台,放射诊疗工作人员2 480人,每百万人口拥有的设备及人员数量分别为140.03台和376.24人;2020年度无锡市医疗照射应用频度为1 137.53人次/千人口,其中常规X射线诊断为646.17人次/千人口,CT诊断为394.11人次/千人口,介入诊疗5.34人次/千人口,放射治疗0.79人/千人口,核医学诊疗7.12人/千人口。介入治疗、核医学诊疗及放疗主要集中在三级医院。结论 无锡市放射诊疗资源配备,高于全国及全省平均水平,然存在资源配置不均衡的情况。常规X射线及CT检查应用频度高于全省水平,医疗照射引起的人群集体剂量较高,需加强放射诊疗活动正当性判断。     

3种介入术中工作人员的辐射剂量水平分析

目的 分析和评价临床实施较多的3种典型介入术中,工作人员的辐射剂量水平.方法 用仿真模体模拟实际诊疗情况,用热释光(TLD)元件作为测量工具,检测X射线机旁有/无防护组合时介人工作者眼晶状体、颈部及胸部的辐射剂量水平,估算其眼晶状体当量剂量和有效剂量.结果 X射线机旁有防护设施条件下,头部受照剂量减少85%～90%.脑血管介入术第一手术者眼晶状体当量剂量高于心血管和外周血管介入术,外周血管介入术第一手术者年有效剂量低于脑血管和心血管介入术.结论 介入工作者在本研究中使用的防护措施及适当的工作强度下,年有效剂量不会超过20 mSv的限值,但眼晶状体当量剂量可能会超过ICRP最新推荐的眼晶状体剂量限值(20 mSv),介入工作者应重视对眼晶状体的防护.

Abstract：

Objective To assess the level of radiation exposures of operators in three typical types of interventional fluoroscopic procedures.Methods Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART) phantom was used to stimulate the practices of diagnosis and therapy using TLDs for dose measurement.The radiation exposures of eye lens, neck, and breast were measured when the lead shielding of machine was on/off and the equivalent dose and effective dose to the eye lens were estimated.Results Radiation exposure of head was obviously reduced by 85% -90% when the lead shielding was on.The doses in different procedures were different.In cerebral angiography the dose equivalent of eye len was the highest in the three procedures.The annual effective dose for the operators was smaller in peripheral vascular interventions than that in cardiovascular interventional therapy and that in cerebral angiography.Conclusions The operators involved in intervention will receive an annual effective dose of less than 20 mSv as recommended by the ICRP under the protection conditions provided by the current study, except for eye lens.Attention should be paid to the protection of the eyes of operators.     

床旁防护屏在冠状动脉介入诊疗过程中对不同操作者的防护作用

目的 探讨床旁防护屏对冠状动脉介入诊疗过程中,第一及第二术者位置辐射剂量的屏蔽效果。方法 采用冠状动脉造影过程中常用的足位、右足位、左足位、头位、左头位、左侧位、右侧位7个体位,桡动脉途径,对标准仿真人模体进行曝光采集。测量高度125 cm,在不同采集体位时,测量有无床旁防护屏情况下的入射体表剂量率,采用t检验比较体表入射剂量率是否存在差异,并分别计算辐射剂量的屏蔽效果。结果 在无床旁防护屏情况下,各采集体位第一术者位置的剂量率高于第二术者(t=97.1~2 263.0,P<0.05);在有床旁防护屏情况下各采集体位(除左足位外)第一术者的剂量率低于第二术者(t=-80.9~275.1,P<0.05);床旁防护屏对第一、第二术者位置的辐射剂量屏蔽率范围分别为92.26%~99.36%、27.83%~97.90%。结论 采用床旁防护屏可有效降低操作者位置的辐射剂量,并改变了操作者站立区域的剂量分布,冠状动脉介入诊疗过程中应充分利用床旁防护屏,同时重点关注第二术者的防护。     

TOPSIS法与秩和比法模糊联合分析2017年全国医用辐射防护监测执行情况

目的 对2017年全国31个省、直辖市和自治区的医疗卫生机构医用辐射防护监测考核评分的20项指标结果进行分析，为进一步促进、优化全国医疗卫生机构医用辐射防护监测提供技术支持和参考。方法 依据《医疗卫生机构医用辐射防护监测工作考核评分表》（2017），运用TOPSIS法与秩和比法加权模糊联合方法，对2017年全国医疗卫生机构医用辐射防护监测执行情况进行分析并作出综合评价。结果 TOPSIS法与秩和比法加权模糊联合分析显示各指标从高到低排名前3位为：制订方案（组织制定省级实施方案并以行政文件形式下发）、专人负责（有专人负责项目，有各地市参与项目的工作人员名册通许录）和经费保障；后3位为：放射治疗设备检测完成情况、创新和亮点、放射治疗设备全覆盖情况。结论 TOPSIS法与秩和比法的模糊联合应用可以为2017年全国医疗卫生机构医用辐射防护监测的执行情况提供综合量化结果，客观评价了各指标的执行情况，总结2017年工作亮点和瓶颈问题，为进一步优化全国医疗卫生机构医用辐射防护监测提供技术支持和参考。     

The linear nonthreshold (LNT) model as used in radiation protection: an NCRP update

Abstract

Purpose: The linear nonthreshold (LNT) model has been used in radiation protection for over 40 years and has been hotly debated. It relies heavily on human epidemiology, with support from radiobiology. The scientific underpinnings include NCRP Report No. 136 (‘Evaluation of the Linear-Nonthreshold Dose-Response Model for Ionizing Radiation’), UNSCEAR 2000, ICRP Publication 99 (2004) and the National Academies BEIR VII Report (2006). NCRP Scientific Committee 1–25 is reviewing recent epidemiologic studies focusing on dose-response models, including threshold, and the relevance to radiation protection.

Methods and materials: Recent studies after the BEIR VII Report are being critically reviewed and include atomic-bomb survivors, Mayak workers, atomic veterans, populations on the Techa River, U.S. radiological technologists, the U.S. Million Person Study, international workers (INWORKS), Chernobyl cleanup workers, children given computerized tomography scans, and tuberculosis-fluoroscopy patients. Methodologic limitations, dose uncertainties and statistical approaches (and modeling assumptions) are being systematically evaluated.

Results: The review of studies continues and will be published as an NCRP commentary in 2017. Most studies reviewed to date are consistent with a straight-line dose response but there are a few exceptions. In the past, the scientific consensus process has worked in providing practical and prudent guidance. So pragmatic judgment is anticipated. The evaluations are ongoing and the extensive NCRP review process has just begun, so no decisions or recommendations are in stone.

Conclusions: The march of science requires a constant assessment of emerging evidence to provide an optimum, though not necessarily perfect, approach to radiation protection. Alternatives to the LNT model may be forthcoming, e.g. an approach that couples the best epidemiology with biologically-based models of carcinogenesis, focusing on chronic (not acute) exposure circumstances. Currently for the practical purposes of radiation protection, the LNT hypothesis reigns supreme as the best of the rest, but new epidemiology and radiobiology might change these conclusions. Stay tuned!     

Lehre und Forschung an Verstorbenen

At the Institute for Legal Medicine of the University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf in addition to legal autopsies according to § 87 of the German Penal Code (Strafprozeßordnung StPO) diverse other interventions are carried out on corpses (also sometimes body donors) within the framework of teaching and research as well as clinical practice, e.g. tissue explantation according to the Human Tissue Act, medicolegal autopsies according to the Hamburg Autopsy Act, surgical interventions within the framework of the so-called Post-Mortem Learning Center and scientific investigations on (anonymous) tissue and bone. In this context legal medicine is (also) perceived as a discipline with clinical relevance, particularly with respect to quality assurance and innovation. Diverse legal and ethical aspects must be taken into consideration.     

全国医用辐射防护监测信息系统构建及应用情况

目的 依托全国放射卫生信息平台,建立全国医用辐射防护监测信息系统,支持国家医用辐射防护监测项目数据上报,全面了解医用辐射防护现状。方法 根据国家医用辐射防护监测方案、法规和标准,前端采用HTML、CSS、JavaScript,后端采用JAVA语言,平台数据库采用SQL server,开发中间件为Tomcat。系统通过B/S的架构建立数据上报和分析系统,并对2017年度的监测数据进行了统计分析。结果 平台的业务组成包括数据采集（通过各业务系统）、数据资源整合（整合业务系统公共数据）、应用和展现4个层次。实现架构灵活、信息集中、操作便捷的全国医用辐射防护监测系统,完成2017年国家医用辐射防护信息的上报,汇总和数据统计分析,2017年度共上报33 565所医院放射防护基本情况和10 624台放射诊疗设备性能及防护信息。共完成统计信息报表95个,分别从时间、行政地理信息、医院级别、设备种类4个维度描述全国医用辐射防护现状。结论 医用辐射防护监测系统达到设计目的,顺利完成2017年数据上报,为了解全国医用辐射防护现状和放射诊疗防护管理政策制定提供了数据支持。