美國(guó)《保健物理》(Health Physics)雜志英文摘要(2024 年 127 卷第 6 期)

Health Phys. Abstracts，Volume 127，Number 6

Indoor Radon Concentrations in Severe Cold Area and Cold Area and Impact of Energy-saving Designon Indoor Radon in China

Yunyun Wu1 ， Yanchao Song1 ， Changsong Hou1 ， Hongxing Cui1 ， Bing Shang1 ， Haoran Sun1

（1. Key Laboratory of Radiological Protection and Nuclear Emergency， China CDC amp; National Institute for Radiological Protection，Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention， Beijing 100088， China）

Abstract：This study investigated indoor radon concentrations in modern residential buildings in the Cold Area and Severe ColdArea in China. A total of 19 cities covering 16 provinces were selected with 1， 610 dwellings measured for indoor radonconcentration. The arithmetic mean and geometric mean of indoor radon concentration were 68 Bq m-3 and 57 Bq m-3 ，respectively. It was found that indoor radon concentrations were much higher in the Severe Cold Area than those in the Cold Area.The indoor radon concentrations showed an increasing trend for newly constructed buildings. It was estimated that the averageeffective dose from inhalation of indoor radon is 2. 15 mSv and 1. 60 mSv for the Severe Cold Area and Cold Area， respectively.The more and more rigid energy-saving design for residential buildings in the Severe Cold Area and Cold Area has an obviousimpact on the increased trend of indoor radon due to extremely low air exchange rate in China.

Key words： cancer; health effects; radon; 222 Rn; indoor

Health Phys. 127（6）：682-687; 2024

Methods to Track Effective Doses from Airborne Radioactive Emissions for Compliance with 40 CFR61， SUBPART H

Amber M. Harshman1 and William L. McCarter1

（1. Environmental Protection Services Division， Oak Ridge National Laboratory， Oak Ridge， TN）

Abstract：US Department of Energy national laboratories can play an integral role in not only the advancement of science but also inthe treatment of various medical conditions through research and development activities conducted at radioisotope productionfacilities. A project has been underway at Oak Ridge National Laboratory since 2016 whose mission is to produce and supply theradioisotope 227 Ac， which is used in a radiopharmaceutical developed to treat certain types of prostate cancer and bone metastases.Production activities result in the environmental release of airborne radioactive emissions， which are governed by Clean Air Actregulations described in 40 CFR Part 61， Subpart H. Stack 3039， the source that emits radioactive effluents from 227 Ac production，is subject to additional requirements outlined in American National Standards Institute （ ANSI） N13. 1 - 1969 due to itsgrandfathered status. Radioactive emissions are limited to levels below those that would cause annual compliance dose standards formembers of the public to be exceeded and stack 3039 to lose its grandfathered status. To allow for maximum production of 227 Acwithout exceeding relevant dose limits， monthly tracking of project emissions and resulting CAP88-PC modeled effective doses to amaximally exposed individual have been implemented. Four years of tracking data were compiled and analyzed to identify additionalmethods that could be used to estimate project doses more frequently， potentially further optimizing 227 Ac production whilemaintaining compliance with applicable regulations.

Key words： dose assessment; effective dose; dose assessment; modeling; radioactivity; airborne

Health Phys. 127（6）：688-701; 2024

Optimizing Regulatory Reviews for Clinical Protocols That Use Radiopharmaceuticals： Findings of theUniversity of Pennsylvania Radiation Research Safety Committee

Sylvia S. Rhodes1 ， Janelle E. Jesikiewicz2 ， Nikhil Yegya-Raman1 ， Kavya Prasad2 ， Alexandra Dreyfuss3 ， David A. Mankoff4 ，Neil K. Taunk1，4

（1. Department of Radiation Oncology， Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania， Philadelphia， PA;2. Environmental Health and Radiation Safety， University of Pennsylvania， Philadelphia， PA;3. Department of Radiation Oncology， Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center， New York， New York;4. Department of Radiology， Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania， Philadelphia， PA）

Abstract：Institutional radiation safety committees review research studies with radiation exposure. However， ensuring that thepotential patient benefit and knowledge gained merit the radiation risks involved often necessitates revisions that inadvertently delayprotocol activations. This quality-improvement study analyzed protocols， identified factors associated with approval time by aradiation safety committee， and developed guidelines to expedite reviews without compromising quality. Clinical protocols submittedto the University of Pennsylvania’ s Radiation Research Safety Committee （ RRSC） for review between 2017 and 2021 werestudied. Protocol characteristics， review outcome， stipulations， and approval times were summarized. Statistical analysis（Spearman's rho） was used to investigate stipulations and approval time; rank-sum analysis （Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon） wasused to determine whether approval time differed by protocol characteristics. One hundred ten （110） protocols were analyzed.Approximately two-thirds of protocols used approved radiopharmaceuticals to aid investigational therapy trials. Twenty-three percent（23%） of protocols received RRSC approval， and 73% had approval withheld with stipulations， which included requests for editsor additional information. Submissions had a median of three stipulations. Median and mean RRSC approval times were 62 and 80.1 d， and 41% of protocols received RRSC approval after IRB approval. RRSC approval time was positively correlated withstipulations （Spearman’s rho = 0. 632， p lt; 0. 001）. RRSC approval time was longer for studies using investigational new drugs（median 80 d） than approved radiopharmaceuticals （median 57 d， p = 0. 05）. The review process is lengthy and may benefitfrom changes， including publishing standardized radiation safety language and commonly required documents and encouragingtimely response to stipulations.

Key words： exposure; radiation; health effects; medical radiation; safety standards

Health Phys. 127（6）：702-711; 2024

Effect of Protective Eyewear on Physicians’ Lens Exposure during Fluoroscopy

Takahira Hitomi1 ， Kudo Takashi2 ， Ideguchi Reiko2

（1. Department of Radioisotope Medicine， Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences， 1 - 12 - 4 Sakamoto，Nagasaki， Nagasaki， 852-8523 Japan;2. Department of Radioisotope Medicine， Atomic Bomb Disease Institute， Nagasaki University， 1- 12- 4 Sakamoto， Nagasaki，Nagasaki， 852-8523 Japan）

Abstract：The ICRP 2011 Seoul Statement recommended a reduction in the dose limit for lens exposure to 100 mSv for 5 y and 50mSv for 1 y. Based on this recommendation， the dose limit for lens exposure was lowered in Japan with the revision of the IonizationRegulations， which took effect in April 2021. In the present study， lens doses were measured during fluoroscopic proceduresperformed in four departments （ Urology， Pediatrics， Gastroenterology， and Orthopedics）. Lens doses were measured withoutprotective eyewear for 6 mo （pre-intervention） and then with protective eyewear for the next 6 mo （post-intervention）. Monthlydoses were collected and lens doses before and after the use of protective eyewear were calculated as the lens dose per unit time.The use of protective eyewear reduced the lens dose per unit time by approximately two thirds. In all departments， the lens dosewas slightly lower after than before the intervention. A significant difference was observed in lens doses between the pre- andpostintervention periods in the Urology department. The present results demonstrated the effectiveness of protective eyewear in dailypractice. Therefore， the use of protective eyewear is recommended during fluoroscopic procedures.

Key words： exposure; radiation; fluoroscopy; health effects; radiation protection

Health Phys. 127（6）：712-718; 2024

Uranium in Drinking Water and Bladder Cancer： A Case-control Study in Michigan

Perpetua Uduba1 ， Lissa Soares2 ， Tesleem Babalola2 ， Melissa Slotnick3 ， Aaron Linder4 ， Jaymie R. Meliker2，5

（1. Department of Biology Stony Brook University;2. Program in Public Health， Stony Brook University;3. Department of Nutritional Sciences， University of Michigan School of Public Health;4. Department of Chemistry， Vassar College;5. Department of Family， Population， amp; Preventive Medicine， Stony Brook Renaissance School of Medicine）

Abstract：Uranium is naturally occurring in groundwater used for drinking; however， health risks from naturally occurringconcentrations are uncertain. Uranium can cause both radiological and chemical toxicity following ingestion. Bladder and kidneysreceive a dose when uranium is excreted into the urine. Investigate the association between uranium in drinking water and bladdercancer risk in a case-control study. A population-based bladder cancer case-control study was conducted in 11 counties ofsoutheastern Michigan. A total of 411 cases and 566 controls provided drinking water and toenail samples and answered questionsabout lifestyle and residential history. Uranium was measured in drinking water and toenails， and its association with bladdercancer was assessed via unconditional logistic regression models. Median uranium concentration in water was 0. 12 μg L-1 ， with amaximum of 4. 99 μg L-1 ， and median uranium concentration in toenails was 0. 0031 μg g-1 . In adjusted regression models， therewas a suggestion of a protective effect among those exposed to the upper quartile of uranium in drinking water （HR = 0. 64， 95%CI： 0. 43， 0. 96） and toenails （HR 0. 66; 95% CI 0. 45， 0. 96） compared to those in the lowest quartile. Our objective is toinvestigate additional adjustment of drinking water source at home residence at time of recruitment to address potential selection biasand confounding attenuated results toward the 1 for drinking water uranium （HR = 0. 68， 95% CI： 0. 44， 1. 05） and toenailuranium （HR = 0. 80， 95% CI： 0. 53， 1. 20）. This case-control study showed no increased risk of bladder cancer associated withuranium found in drinking water or toenails.

Key words： 238 U; cancer; epidemiology; water; ground

Health Phys. 127（6）：719-724; 2024

The Effects of Abnormal Exposure on Individual Dose Monitoring with TLD Dosimeters

Yanling Yi1 and Michael G. Stabin2

（1. Institute of Radiation Medicine， Fudan University， 2094 Xietu Road， Shanghai 200032， China;2. RADAR， Inc. Kennewick， WA）

Abstract： Objectives： To analyze the effects of normal X-ray inspection， machine washing， and machine drying onthermoluminescent dosimeter （TLD） measurements during external individual monitoring and to provide suggestions for determiningindividual monitoring measurements under the mentioned abnormal situations. In this study， we focused on three abnormalsituations： X-ray inspection， machine washing， and machine drying， which are common in external individual dose monitoring. Wemeasured and compared the doses from TLD with and without 11， 23， 35， and 50 security checks. We used different radiationsources to expose the TLDs before or after machine washing with or without hot drying. The three radiation sources are naturalbackground radiation， 137 Cs g rays， and 320 kVp X-rays. We measured 20 TLDs for each situation. The average doses for theTLDs with 11， 23， 35， 50 security checks are 27. 7 μGy， 59. 7 μGy， 84. 1 μGy， and 121. 0 μGy， respectively. We measured anaverage dose of 2. 5 μGy per exposure. The doses showed no significant difference between different times of washing with differentradiation sources， natural background radiation， 137 Cs， or X-ray exposures. There was also no significant difference between thedose coming from the controlled group， drying at 60 ℃ and 90 ℃ for 1 h after exposure to 137 Cs g rays and 320 kVp X-rays. Thecommon machine drying under the temperature of 90 ℃ did not affect TLD measured doses.

Key words： operational topics; dosimetry; external; dosimetry; personnel; radiation protection

Health Phys. 127：730-733; 2024