RESUMO
As the ionizing radiation to which workers are exposed is related to possible harmful biological effect, its dose evaluation gains relevance. Although the effects of low doses are still controversial, the radiation protection authorities assume that any dose of ionizing radiation is potentially harmful to the human health and adopt the linear non-threshold model for the dose-effect relation. The Dosimetry Laboratory of the Institute of Physics of the University of São Paulo performs the external individual monitoring of workers exposed to X- and gamma-rays since 1981, with the technique of thermoluminescence. Currently, ~500 badges are provided to the university professionals mostly working in research laboratories and hospitals. Data of individual annual dose equivalent collected from 1995 to 2015 and the performance of the monitoring service are presented in this paper.
Assuntos
Exposição Ocupacional/análise , Dosimetria Termoluminescente/métodos , Brasil , Desenho de Equipamento , Raios gama , Humanos , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Doses de Radiação , Lesões por Radiação/prevenção & controle , Radiação Ionizante , Medição de Risco , Dosimetria Termoluminescente/instrumentação , Universidades , Raios XAssuntos
Moléculas de Adesão Celular/genética , Fenda Labial/genética , Fissura Palatina/genética , Ligação Genética/genética , Proteínas com Domínio T/genética , Animais , Humanos , Nectinas , Fator de Crescimento Transformador beta/genética , Fator de Crescimento Transformador beta/metabolismo , Venezuela , Cromossomo X/genéticaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Interventional techniques in endoscopy such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have greatly increased since laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become widespread; mainly these techniques deal with common bile duct stones. Fluoroscopy is usually employed, and chronic exposure to X-ray, in spite of the relative low dose, can lead to potentially unhealthy conditions such as malignancies like bone marrow and other solid cancers. A median of 18 years of life is lost per fatal cancer, including the time of latency since exposure. Nor should one forget benign condition such as cataracts that can lead to partial or complete blindness and which surely impair life's quality. METHODS: Simulated examinations were carried at the University Hospital (São Paulo, Brazil) using an anthropomorphic phantom in place of the physician. Four sets of dosimeters were placed in the forehead, neck, torso, and lower abdomen (with and without a lead apron) and standard ERCP fluoroscopic techniques were employed. RESULTS: The dose equivalents were calculated and compared to the recommended exposure doses of national and international boards of radiation protection. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results found and compared to standards, working safely means: (1) A lead (0.5 mm thickness) apron is fundamental. Without it less than one ERCP\month should be performed. (2) With an apron, 23 examinations/month are allowed. (3) No thyroid protection grants only 19 exams/month. (4) Performing ERCP without lead glasses is hazardous to the eye, allowing only seven ERCPs monthly.