Occupational radiation monitoring practices in the southwest region of Pakistan

Shafiq, Sunnia; Ahmad, Hafiz Khush Naseeb; Naheed, Hameeda; Manzoor, Hina; Shuja, Jamila; Rehman, Awais-ur-; Arif, Imran; Sadiq, Muhammad; Kanwal, Shagufta; Iftikhar, Shehla

doi:10.61186/rabms.10.3.245

Volume 10, Issue 3 (7-2024) Journal of Research in Applied and Basic Medical Sciences 2024, 10(3): 245-250 | Back to browse issues page

‎ 10.61186/rabms.10.3.245

Ethics code: Dir-3(17)/24

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Shafiq S, Ahmad H K N, Naheed H, Manzoor H, Shuja J, Rehman A, et al . Occupational radiation monitoring practices in the southwest region of Pakistan. Journal of Research in Applied and Basic Medical Sciences 2024; 10 (3) :245-250
URL: http://ijrabms.umsu.ac.ir/article-1-342-en.html

Occupational radiation monitoring practices in the southwest region of Pakistan

Sunnia Shafiq ^*

, Hafiz Khush Naseeb Ahmad

, Imran Arif

CENAR Hospital Quetta, Pakistan , Suniyakhan19@gmail.com

Abstract: (914 Views)

Background & Aims: The article aims to evaluate trends in occupational radiation exposure for employees in different departments at the Center for Nuclear Medicine and Radiotherapy (CENAR), Quetta, Pakistan.
Materials & Methods: This retrospective study examination of 9780 film dosimeter dose data was carried out from 2019 to 2023. The quantities analyzed were the highest and minimum annual effective doses, distribution of workers, and their average yearly effective doses in different effective dose intervals. The annual collective effective dose and average effective dosage were also included.
Results: Yearly average effective doses in Radiotherapy, Nuclear Medicine, Medical Physics, and Diagnostic Radiology range from 0.5 to 3.00 mSv. Records show that 90% of workers fall within 1-3.00 mSv, with 10% between 0.5 mSv and the minimum detectable level. Minimum and maximum yearly individual doses in Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine are 0.10 mSv and 2.3 mSv. Average doses for the fields range from 1.01 to 1.14 mSv.
Conclusion: Employees received doses that were lower than the yearly maximum, showing successful radiation shielding. The findings imply that safety measures are followed in the researched departments, which is important for clinical practice. This research improves our understanding of occupational radiation exposure, notably at CENAR, and promotes radiation safety in medical settings.

Keywords: Annual Dose, Distance Shielding, Occupational Radiation, Radiation Protection, Radioactive Sources, Time

Full-Text [PDF 312 kb] (288 Downloads) | | Full-Text (HTML) (128 Views)

Type of Study: orginal article | Subject: Medical Physics

References

1. Singh B, Singh J, Kaur A. Applications of radioisotopes in agriculture. Int J Biotchnol Bioeng 2013;4:167-74. [GOOGLE SCHOLAR]

2. Laidler JB. National council on radiation protection and measurements. NCRP report no. 70 nuclear medicine‐factors influencing the choice of radionuclides in diagnosis and therapy. Bethesda, Maryland: NCRP Publications; 1982. 180 p. [DOI:10.1002/jlcr.2580200715]

3. Charles M. Effects of Ionizing Radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation: UNSCEAR 2006 Report, Volume 1-Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes A and B. [DOI:10.18356/7fb405cb-en]

4. Leszczynski D. The Grand Challenge: use of a new approach in developing policies in the area of radiation and health. Front Pub Health 2014;2:50. [DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2014.00050] [PMID] []

5. Weizhang W, Wenyi Z, Ronglin C, Liang'an Z. Occupational exposures of Chinese medical radiation workers in 1986-2000. Rad Protect Dosimet 2005;117(4):440-3. [DOI:10.1093/rpd/nci312] [PMID]

6. Mora P, Acuña M. Assessment of medical occupational radiation doses in Costa Rica. Rad Protect Dosimet 2011;147(1-2):230-2. [DOI:10.1093/rpd/ncr341] [PMID]

7. Bolus NE. Review of common occupational hazards and safety concerns for nuclear medicine technologists. J Nucl Med Technol 2008;36(1):11-7. [DOI:10.2967/jnmt.107.043869] [PMID]

8. Martin A, Harbison SA. The external Radiation hazard. In: Martin A, Harbison SA, editors. Introd Radia Protec 1980; 85-106. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4899-6940-8_8]

9. Bushong SC. A Book Report. Radiol Technol 2013;84(4):405-9. []

10. Authority PN. Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority. International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60: Annals of ICRP 21(1-3), New York. Internatonal Commission on Radiologi cal Protection; 1991. Available from: https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%2060 [URL]

11. Jabeen A, Munir M, Khalil A, Masood M, Akhter P. Occupational exposure from external radiation used in medical practices in Pakistan by film badge dosimetry. Rad Protect Dosimet 2010;140(4):396-401. [DOI:10.1093/rpd/ncq134] [PMID]

12. Weizhang W, Wenyi Z, Ronglin C, Liang'an Z. Occupational exposures of Chinese medical radiation workers in 1986-2000. Rad Protect Dosimet 2005;117(4):440-3. [DOI:10.1093/rpd/nci312] [PMID]

13. Korir GK, Wambani JS, Korir IK. Estimation of annual occupational effective doses from external ionising radiation at medical institutions in Kenya. SA J Radiol 2011;15(4). [DOI:10.4102/sajr.v15i4.353]

14. Carreiro JV, Avelar R. Occupational exposure in medical and paramedical professions in Portugal. Rad Protect Dosimet. 1991;36(2-4):233-6. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a081003]

15. Ohagwu AO, Njoku J. Evaluation of personnel radiation monitoring in radiodiagnostic centres in South Eastern Nigeria. Afr J Basic Appl Sci 2010;2(1-2):49-53. [GOOGLE SCHOLAR]