The 2019-2020 EURADOS WG10 and RENEB Field Test of Retrospective Dosimetry Methods in a Small-Scale Incident Involving Ionizing Radiation
(2021) In Radiation Research 195(3). p.253-264- Abstract
With the use of ionizing radiation comes the risk of accidents and malevolent misuse. When unplanned exposures occur, there are several methods which can be used to retrospectively reconstruct individual radiation exposures; biological methods include analysis of aberrations and damage of chromosomes and DNA, while physical methods rely on luminescence (TL/OSL) or EPR signals. To ensure the quality and dependability of these methods, they should be evaluated under realistic exposure conditions. In 2019, EURADOS Working Group 10 and RENEB organized a field test with the purpose of evaluating retrospective dosimetry methods as carried out in potential real-life exposure scenarios. A 1.36 TBq 192Ir source was used to irradiate... (More)
With the use of ionizing radiation comes the risk of accidents and malevolent misuse. When unplanned exposures occur, there are several methods which can be used to retrospectively reconstruct individual radiation exposures; biological methods include analysis of aberrations and damage of chromosomes and DNA, while physical methods rely on luminescence (TL/OSL) or EPR signals. To ensure the quality and dependability of these methods, they should be evaluated under realistic exposure conditions. In 2019, EURADOS Working Group 10 and RENEB organized a field test with the purpose of evaluating retrospective dosimetry methods as carried out in potential real-life exposure scenarios. A 1.36 TBq 192Ir source was used to irradiate anthropomorphic phantoms in different geometries at doses of several Gy in an outdoor open-air geometry. Materials intended for accident dosimetry (including mobile phones and blood) were placed on the phantoms together with reference dosimeters (LiF, NaCl, glass). The objective was to estimate radiation exposures received by individuals as measured using blood and fortuitous materials, and to evaluate these methods by comparing the estimated doses to reference measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. Herein we describe the overall planning, goals, execution and preliminary outcomes of the 2019 field test. Such field tests are essential for the development of new and existing methods. The outputs from this field test include useful experience in terms of planning and execution of future exercises, with respect to time management, radiation protection, and reference dosimetry to be considered to obtain relevant data for analysis.
(Less)
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2021
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Humans, Iridium Radioisotopes/adverse effects, Monte Carlo Method, Phantoms, Imaging, Radiation Dosage, Radiation Exposure/adverse effects, Radiation Monitoring/methods, Radiation Protection, Radiation, Ionizing, Radiometry/methods
- in
- Radiation Research
- volume
- 195
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 253 - 264
- publisher
- Radiation Research Society
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85101942523
- pmid:33347576
- ISSN
- 0033-7587
- DOI
- 10.1667/RADE-20-00243.1
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- additional info
- ©2021 by Radiation Research Society. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
- id
- c6182c50-b5a8-4d79-99da-17dfcbdf83bc
- date added to LUP
- 2021-12-08 07:58:38
- date last changed
- 2024-11-04 12:34:59
@article{c6182c50-b5a8-4d79-99da-17dfcbdf83bc, abstract = {{<p>With the use of ionizing radiation comes the risk of accidents and malevolent misuse. When unplanned exposures occur, there are several methods which can be used to retrospectively reconstruct individual radiation exposures; biological methods include analysis of aberrations and damage of chromosomes and DNA, while physical methods rely on luminescence (TL/OSL) or EPR signals. To ensure the quality and dependability of these methods, they should be evaluated under realistic exposure conditions. In 2019, EURADOS Working Group 10 and RENEB organized a field test with the purpose of evaluating retrospective dosimetry methods as carried out in potential real-life exposure scenarios. A 1.36 TBq 192Ir source was used to irradiate anthropomorphic phantoms in different geometries at doses of several Gy in an outdoor open-air geometry. Materials intended for accident dosimetry (including mobile phones and blood) were placed on the phantoms together with reference dosimeters (LiF, NaCl, glass). The objective was to estimate radiation exposures received by individuals as measured using blood and fortuitous materials, and to evaluate these methods by comparing the estimated doses to reference measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. Herein we describe the overall planning, goals, execution and preliminary outcomes of the 2019 field test. Such field tests are essential for the development of new and existing methods. The outputs from this field test include useful experience in terms of planning and execution of future exercises, with respect to time management, radiation protection, and reference dosimetry to be considered to obtain relevant data for analysis.</p>}}, author = {{Waldner, L. and Bernhardsson, C. and Woda, C. and Trompier, F. and Van Hoey, O and Kulka, U and Oestreicher, U and Bassinet, C and Rääf, C and Discher, M and Endesfelder, D and Eakins, J S and Gregoire, E and Wojcik, A and Ristic, Y and Kim, H and Lee, J and Yu, H and Kim, M C and Abend, M and Ainsbury, E}}, issn = {{0033-7587}}, keywords = {{Humans; Iridium Radioisotopes/adverse effects; Monte Carlo Method; Phantoms, Imaging; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Exposure/adverse effects; Radiation Monitoring/methods; Radiation Protection; Radiation, Ionizing; Radiometry/methods}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{253--264}}, publisher = {{Radiation Research Society}}, series = {{Radiation Research}}, title = {{The 2019-2020 EURADOS WG10 and RENEB Field Test of Retrospective Dosimetry Methods in a Small-Scale Incident Involving Ionizing Radiation}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1667/RADE-20-00243.1}}, doi = {{10.1667/RADE-20-00243.1}}, volume = {{195}}, year = {{2021}}, }