Evaluation of equivalent dose to eye lens through dose equivalent Hp(3).

Autor: Marcantonini M; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy. Electronic address: marta.marcantonini@ospedale.perugia.it., Chiappiniello A; Physics and Geology Department, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy., Beneventi S; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy., Reggioli V; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy., Dipilato AC; Surgical and Biomedical Sciences Department, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy., Fulcheri CPL; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy., Iacco M; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy., Zucchetti C; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy., Tarducci R; Medical Physics Department, Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) [Phys Med] 2019 Aug; Vol. 64, pp. 29-32. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Jun 21.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.04.030
Abstrakt: Purpose: Individual dosimetry allows to quantify doses from ionizing radiation of exposed workers. Scientific and epidemiological evidences highlight the need for adequate measures for a greater protection of the eye and a reduction in annual doses. ICRP Publication 103, illustrating the operational dose quantity Hp(d) for the individual monitoring, proposes a depth d = 3 mm for eye lens monitoring, indicating that even the Hp(0.07) can be used. In this study, it was investigated if there are differences in the evaluation of the equivalent dose to eye lens (H lens ) using Hp(3) or Hp(0.07).
Materials and Methods: A slab phantom calibration was performed by an Accredited Calibration Laboratory in terms of Hp(3) and Hp(0.07) using ext-rad TLD-100 (LiF:Mg,Ti) dosimeters. Hp(0.07) and Hp(3) were measured for 26 exposed workers to assess H lens . The measuring took place monthly in 2017 to obtain both semestral and annual doses.
Results: H lens (0.07) was always smaller than H lens (3). However, the differences were not statistically significant (Mann-Whitney test, p > 0.05) for both semestral and annual doses. The percentage differences were 7 ± 3%, 6 ± 3% and 7 ± 2% for I semester, II semester and whole year, respectively. The mean underestimation index <10%, intra-class correlation coefficient >0.99, coefficient of variation <3% and the excellent correlation (R 2  ≈ 0.999) for both semestral and annual doses highlighted that Hp(0.07) can be used to evaluate H lens instead of Hp(3).
Conclusions: No statistical evidence was found that the use of Hp(0.07) underestimates the equivalent dose to eye lens obtained through Hp(3).
(Copyright © 2019 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: