Search

The measurements of radon concentrations in drinking water sources in and around the Main Central Thrust (MCT) region in Garhwal Himalaya, India, were carried out using the scintillation detector-based SMART RnDuo technique for radiation protection purposes. Radon values in the analyzed samples were observed between 1.1 and 183.9 Bq L−1 (AM = 19.7 Bq L−1). Radon values in 94% of the samples were found well below the World Health Organization (WHO) reference limit. The estimated radiation doses for different age groups were found higher than the WHO safe limit of 100 µSv y−1 (from all sources including radon) except for the age groups of 0–12 months infants and 1–3 years children. The results of this study may be useful for future studies on epidemiology, examining hidden faults, uranium exploration etc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION On November 8, 1895, Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen discovered x-rays. Recent developments in imaging technology have led to a rapid increase in the use of ionizing radiation in medicine, which has potential for resolving a variety of clinical problems (1,2). The application of medical radiation in the diagnosis of disease, various procedures, and the surgical management of patients is increasing day by day. Radiation is defined as a moving form of energy (3). We use both ionizing and non-ionizing radiation commonly in our day-to-day practice (4). According to its effects on the substance, radiation is divided into two groups: ionizing and non-ionizing radiation (5). Different types of radiation: 1) Ionizing radiation: Ionizing radiation is divided into direct and indirect? Direct ionizing radiation includes alpha particles and beta particles.? Indirect ionizing radiation includes X-rays, gamma rays, and UV rays. 2) Non-ionizing radiation Radiation accidents have enabled the study of the effects of high levels of radiation. The first x-ray machine was introduced in India at the Madras Medical College in 1900. New setups are being established, and radiation workers are constantly being produced through various academic programs. A worker typically wears the personnel monitoring equipment for three months. The employer registers the dosage recorded by the personnel monitoring equipment, which is subsequently forwarded to the dosimetry service provider for evaluation in order to determine the radiation exposure level (6). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In dentistry, radiographs are often used to diagnose and assess problems relating to oral conditions as well as for better treatment planning. Even though the radiation risk offered by X-rays is minimal, the absorption of this lower level radiation in the individual for a long time challenges a health concern. The aim of the study was to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of lead aprons among dental practitioners and specialists in Tamil Nadu. A cross-sectional survey was performed around 100 dentists in Tamil Nadu, India, by framing standard questionnaires and collecting responses by online survey forms such as "Google Forms." The statistical study was undertaken with SPSS version 22 and the Chi-square test was selected to determine the correlation. This study showed that lead aprons were regularly used by 63% of participants during radiation exposure. Thirty percent of participants were aware of radiation protection protocol but neglected to use lead aprons routinely (P = 0.113). About 91% of participants gave more preference for thyroid gland to protect it from dental radiation rather than other head-and-neck organs and 82% of them were using thyroid collars for patients during exposure (P = 0.671). Our survey shows that the usage of lead aprons is practiced strictly by dental practitioners under <5 years of clinical experience. However, dental practitioners and specialists were aware of radiation protective aprons but often neglected to use them in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In our day-to-day clinical practice, X-radiation plays a vital role in oral diagnosis and treatment planning in dentistry. However, radiations are harmful and cause biological damage to the human body. Hence to have the benefits outweigh the risks, it is essential to inculcate awareness regarding radiation protection measures among the dental students. Aim: To evaluate the knowledge and attitude towards radiation hazards and protection among the dental students. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 200 randomly selected undergraduate including final year and third year dental students and interns, who had completed their 30 days rotatory posting in the Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology in Maharashtra Institute of Dental Science and Research, Latur, Maharashtra, India from the month February to July 2021. A prevalidated close ended questionnaire consisting of 25 questions was distributed among the students and data were collected and analysed using the Chi-square test. The p-value was set significant at 0.05. Results: Out of 200 student participants, 91 (45.5%) were interns, 71 (35.5%) were final year students and 38 (19%) were third year students. The response of these participants was found to be non uniform and the knowledge and attitude towards radiation hazards and protection was highest in dental interns followed by final and third year students. Conclusion: It is the need of hour to create awareness among dental students about radiation protection and safety in day-today clinical practice and update their knowledge by conducting relevant workshops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the early days of India's nuclear energy programme, Homi Bhabha realized the importance of health physics and radiation safety aspects of nuclear facilities. The health physics and radiation protection activities have grown over the years with the multi-dimensional expansion of nuclear fuel cycle facilities and application of radiation in research, medicine and industry. This initiative further helped in laying a strong foundation for a national regulatory framework. AERB has established a multitier system of safety review and assessment to ensure that the use of ionizing radiation and nuclear energy does not pose an undue risk to the public and the environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Exposure to ionising radiation to Anaesthesiology consultants, residents, technicians and nurses (Anaesthesiology personnel) is steadily increasing as a consequence of growing usage of imaging technology for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey of Anaesthesiology professionals (consultants, residents, technicians and nursing staff) working in three major tertiary care medical institutes in northern India regarding the existing knowledge, attitudes and practices of radiation safety at their workplaces. Methods: A printed and validated 30-point questionnaire was distributed. Questions were graded into the domains of demographics (6 questions), knowledge (9 questions), attitude (4 questions) and practice (11 questions). Data obtained from the responses was collated and analysed statistically Results: Out of the 403 questionnaires distributed, 222 were returned completed (55%). Majority of the respondents were residents (53.60%) and males (57.20%). Many were unaware of the principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA), (70.7%) regarding collimators (65.85%) and their usage (41.9%). Maximum respondents stressed on the necessity of knowing the exposure dosage of radiations (89.2%) and were concerned regarding the same (87.8%). Lead apron was the commonest protection equipment and 97.3% of them were not using dosimeters. Highest levels of knowledge, attitude, and practices were demonstrated by the consultants. In terms of practices, the technicians fared better than the residents. Conclusion: Knowledge, attitude and practices regarding radiation protection issues and doses of radiological procedures is limited. Although all the cadres scored high on their attitude scores, the practice sector requires improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess women surgeons' awareness of radiation protection protocols, cumulative dose, safety measures, radiation exposure, and breast cancer risk in India. Methods: The data were acquired through a survey monkey questionnaire circulated to women orthopaedic surgeons across the country through the WOICE group, e-mails and phone. The questionnaire assessed the respondents' awareness of radiation protection measures and level of exposure. Medical history on breast cancer during their professional life, time of diagnosis, and radiation exposure were collected. Data were analysed and expressed as percentages. Results: Fifty-one women orthopaedic surgeons responded. These were sub-grouped into early and late-career group based on whether they had worked in orthopaedics for less than 10 years (n = 33) or 10 or more years (n = 18). The mean number of years of practice of the respondents was 8.1 years, and for the group with 10 or more years was 18.7 years. 90.2% reported compliance to the lead shield, while 9.8% (n = 5) were non-compliant because of the shield's weight. Of the included respondents, 88.8% are currently working. Among all the respondents, only 13.7% (n = 7) use a radiation dosimeter. Not surprisingly, 88.2% (n = 45) of all respondents were unaware of the total radiation exposure received. Two surgeons in the more than 10-year practice category reported a history of breast carcinoma. Conclusions: This preliminary report suggested a need for more awareness of radiation protection measures among women orthopaedic surgeons. Hence, along with the practice of wearing a lead gown, use of lightweight shield, awareness on exposure measure and use of radiation dosimeter should be encouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the present work, we report the results of measurements of indoor 222Rn, 220Rn, and their progeny concentrations in Ghuttu region of Tehri Garhwal district in the Uttarakhand state of India for radiation protection purposes. The measured concentrations of 222Rn, 220Rn, and their progeny were used to estimate the inhalation doses received by the public. The measured values were found to depend upon different seasons of a calendar year. The annual effective dose attributed to 222Rn, 220Rn, and their progeny exposure was estimated in the range of 0.93–2.37 mSv y−1 with an average of 1.54 ± 0.42 mSv y−1. No significant health risk has been found to be associated with the exposure of 222Rn, 220Rn, and their progeny in the study area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In spite of frequent exposure to radiation, orthopaedic surgeons lack knowledge about radiation safety and do not comply with safety practices. We surveyed orthopaedic trainees and consultants in India to determine their knowledge and practices regarding radiation safety. Methods: A questionnaire with 16 multiple choice questions was sent out using Google forms. We included practicing orthopaedic surgeons (consultants), fellows and trainees pursuing DNB, MS and D. Ortho courses across India. Results: We received 439/700 responses (62.7% response rate) from 233 (53.1%) consultants and 206 (46.9%) trainees. Only 71 (16.2%) were aware of the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle. While lead aprons were always used by 379 (86.3%), thyroid shields were never used by 302 (68.8%) respondents. Knowledge about the ALARA principle was significantly associated with radiation safety practices. A significantly greater proportion of participants who were aware about the ALARA principle always used lead aprons (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.2, p = 0.001) and thyroid shields (OR 2.00; 95% CI 1.0 to 3.7, p = 0.029) and had their dosimeters checked within the last 1 year (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.8, p = 0.039) when compared to those who were not aware of the ALARA principle. Almost 99% respondents expressed interest in participating in a radiation safety training program. Conclusion: A majority of the respondents were keen to obtain training in radiation safety. We believe that professional organizations and hospitals could initiate training programs for the orthopaedic community in India to improve their radiation safety knowledge and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Best radiography practice involves operational optimal machine performance, delivering costeffective healthcare services under appropriate safety conditions for workers and the public. The present study aimed to investigate the safety status of diagnostic X-ray installations in Mizoram, India. Material and Methods: Linearity of time (sec), linearity of current (mA), output reproducibility, table dose (μGy/mAs), peak voltage (kVp) accuracy, and 16 essential safety parameters of 135 X-ray machines were considered in this study. A battery-operated dosimeter and wide-range digital kVp meter were used to measure output radiation and effective peak potential of X-ray tube. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software to obtain the mean, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation. Results: Among different electronic parameters, 59.2% linearity of time, 82.6% linearity of current, 89.7% kVp accuracy, 35.1% output reproducibility, and 92.8% table dose were beyond the acceptable limits. Based on 16 essential safety parameters, it was observed that 98.7% of X-ray machines did not receive proper quality assurance test, 1.9% of the installations employed lead-line patient entrance doors, 46.8% of the machines were operated without any protective barriers and 83.1% of the units were operated without personnel monitoring service. Conclusion: The present study had concluded with more problems than the previous studies in different parts of the world in this regard. Due to the absence of proper quality control (QC) programs, many installations did not follow standard installation guidelines. The authors recommended that proper QC should be implemented by the frequent monitoring of each and every diagnostic X-ray installation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiological imaging is extremely valuable as a diagnostic tool in the pediatric population, but it comes with a number of distinct challenges as compared to the imaging of adults. This is because of the following: It requires dedicated imaging protocols to acquire the images, there is need for sedation or general anesthesia for longer procedures such as MRI, specific training is required for the healthcare personnel involved, thorough knowledge and expertise should be applied for evaluating the images, and most importantly, it requires consideration for radiation exposure if ionizing radiation is being used. One of the challenges for clinical care personnel is to gain the child's trust and co‑operation before and throughout the duration of an examination, which can prove to be difficult in children who may be ill and have pain. This is important to acquire quality images and prevent repeat examinations. Even with a quality examination, the accurate interpretation of images requires a thorough knowledge of the intricate and dynamic face of anatomy a nd specific pathological presentations in children. The increased radiation sensitivity of growing organs and children's longer expected life spans make them more susceptible to the harmful effects of radiation. Imaging pediatric patients in a dedicated pediatric imaging department with dedicated pediatric CT technologists may result in greater compliance with pediatric protocols and significantly reduced patient dose. In order to prevent the harmful effects of ionizing radiation, As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) principle should be strictly followed. This article seeks to draw attention to various challenges of pediatric imaging and the ways to overcome them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: With the expanding use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiological modalities in critically ill patients, doctors working in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) are increasingly exposed to ionizing radiation. This risk of radiation exposure occurs not only during bedside radiologic procedures, but also when ICU physicians accompany patients to radiology suites. The aim of this study was to quantify levels of radiation exposure among medical professionals working in the ICU. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out prospectively over 6 months in the ICU of a tertiary-referral cancer hospital. Two teams consisting of 4 ICU resident doctors each were instructed to wear thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) during their duty shifts. Standard radiation protection precautions were used throughout the study period. TLDs were also placed in selected areas of the ICU to measure the amount of scattered radiation. TLDs were analyzed at the end of every 3 months. Results: The readings recorded on TLDs placed in the ICU were almost immeasurable. The mean value of residents' radiation exposure was 0.059 mSv, though the highest individual reading approached 0.1 mSv. The projected maximum yearly radiation exposure was 0.4 mSv. Conclusions: If standard radiation safety precautions are followed, the cumulative radiation exposure to ICU resident doctors is well within permissible limits and is not a cause of concern. However, with the increasing use of radiological procedures in the management of critically ill patients, there is a need to repeat such audits periodically to monitor radiation exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] CBMN assay of radiation accident victims in India was performed. [•] Sulforaphane was evaluated for its anti-mutagenic potential in vitro. [•] Sulforaphane also ameliorated bleomycin and doxorubicin induced genotoxicity. [•] Sulforaphane enhanced CD 34+Lin− cell survival. [•] Sulforaphane restored the normal HDAC activity level in irradiated lymphocytes. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article discusses the highlights of 32nd Indian Association for Radiation Protection (IARP) international conference on February 22-25, 2016 in Tamil Nadu, India. Radiological Safety in workplace, Nuclear Facilities and Environment was the theme of the conference. A workshop for the awareness of students and research scholars on the application of radiation and radioisotopes was held. The scientific deliberations of the conference are also explored.

The article reviews several websites that offer information on radiation and radiation safety, including the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) located at www.icrp.org , the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements at www.ncrponline.org and the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) at www.aerb.gov.in .

The main threat to human health from heavy metals is associated with exposure to lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic. These metals have been extensively studied and their effects on human health have been regularly reviewed by international bodies such as the WHO. Heavy metals have been used by humans for thousands of years. Although several adverse effects of heavy metals on health have been known for a long time, exposure to them continues and is increasing in some parts of the world, particular in under developed countries, though it has declined in developed countries over the last hundred years. Side by side steadily increasing application of radiations in clinical practice, industrial and agricultural activities, residual radio-activity resulting from nuclear test explosions, has a measurable impact contributing to significant radiation hazards in humans. Our increasing dependence on radiation for energy requirement, therapeutic usages and the perceived threat of radiological terrorism has led to the hunt for a safe and effective radiological protective agent worldwide. Toxicity and unwanted side effects of chemical radio protectors at the effective dose level have limited their clinical efficacy, so the focus is on natural plant products and their active constituents which have limited or no toxicity. Adding to this advantage is their easy availability and large scale consumption in one form or the other across the globe. Chemical radioprotection is an important strategy to protect living beings against deleterious effects of radiation. Earlier the synthetic chemical substances, which could minimize the pathological changes in the living system after exposure to ionizing radiation, were looked into. Herbs have always been the principle form of medicine in India. Medicinal plants are the local heritage with global importance. World is enclosed with a rich wealth of medicinal plants. Several Indian medicinal plants (like Tinospora cordifolia, Emblica officinalis, Aloe vera, Ocimum sanctum, Rosemarinus officinalis, Trigonella foenum-graecum, Alstonia scholaris, Panax ginseng and Moringa oleifera etc.) or plant-derived compounds reportedly effective in countering the harmful effects of radiation in different experimental models of radiation injuries were evaluated for their possible role in radiation protection. These herbal plants have been proved to be potent enough to check the radiation and heavy metals induced histopathological, biochemical, histochemical and haematological changes in animal models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to assess the adequacy level of radiological protection systems available in the diagnostic radiology facilities located in three capital cities of North East (NE) India. It further attempts to understand, using a multi-disciplinary approach, how the safety codes/standards in diagnostic radiology framed by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to achieve adequate radiological protection in facilities, have been perceived, conceptualized, and applied accordingly in these facilities. About 30 diagnostic radiology facilities were randomly selected from three capitals of states in NE India; namely Imphal (Manipur), Shillong (Meghalaya) and Guwahati (Assam). A semi-structured questionnaire developed based on a multi-disciplinary approach was used for this study. It was observed that radiological practices undertaken in these facilities were not exactly in line with safety codes/standards in diagnostic radiology of the AERB and the IAEA. About 50% of the facilities had registered/licensed x-ray equipment with the AERB. More than 80% of the workers did not use radiation protective devices, although these devices were available in the facilities. About 85% of facilities had no institutional risk management system. About 70% of the facilities did not carry out periodic quality assurance testing of their x-ray equipment or surveys of radiation leakage around the x-ray room, and did not display radiation safety indicators in the x-ray rooms. Workers in these facilities exhibited low risk perception about the risks associated with these practices. The majority of diagnostic radiology facilities in NE India did not comply with the radiological safety codes/standards framed by the AERB and IAEA. The study found inadequate levels of radiological protection systems in the majority of facilities. This study suggests a need to establish firm measures that comply with the radiological safety codes/standards of the AERB and IAEA to protect patients, workers and the public of this region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]