Whole-body monitoring

Whole body monitoring. Whole body monitoring is the preferred method of dose assessment for radionuclides that emit penetrating radiation. Whole body counters are used to measure the activity of radioactive material deposited in different parts of the body. From the measured activity, the intake of the person and the resulting internal dose can be calculated using models. Whole body counting should be performed periodically. 

Methods for measuring worker exposure using simultaneous biological monitoring and whole-body dosimetry... 

During refueling, the respective concentrations were 1.64, 1.33, 0.78, 0.19, and 6.34 mBq/m3 (44.3, 35.9, 21,5.1, and 171 fCi/m3). The derived air concentration recommended by the ICRP for occupational exposure is 80.0 mBq/m3 (2,200 fCi/m3). In 1997, the French radiation protection office conducted monitoring (24-hour urine analysis/whole body activity measurements) of workers in the non-nuclear energy field (i.e., nuclear medicine, research laboratories, and non-nuclear industries) to ascertain the occupational intake of radionuclides (De Vathaire et al. 1998). 241Am was not detected in samples from any of the 37 workers who worked with the isotope. 

In order to evaluate "within-worker" variances of dermal exposure and its distribution over the body, whole-body monitoring during three applications and concomitant re-entry was performed for high-volume (HV) applicators (n = 4) and harvesters of carnations (n = 6). 

Dermal exposure assessment Whole-body monitoring... 

In the early 1980s, the whole-body dosimeter (WBD) was introduced as a superior method for passive dermal dosimetry monitoring. A standard protocol was described by the World Health Organization (1982), and Abbott et al. (1987) described some additional options. Chester (1993) reported refinements that permitted exposure estimation by passive dermal dosimetry and biological monitoring simultaneously. 

Eight healthy human volunteers, four males and four females, ages 20-24, were exposed individually (whole body) to concentrations at 0 (air), 1,000, 2,000, 4,000, or 8,000 ppm for 1 h in a 13.6 m3 room (Emmen and Hoogendijk 1998 Emmen et al. 2000).2 Each subject was exposed at each concentration in a partially blind ascending order of concentration. With the exception of one 14-d interval, each exposure was separated by a period of 7 d. Chlorofluorocarbon-12 (CFC-12) was used as a reference compound. No mention was made of the ability of the test subjects to recognize the odor of either test chemical. Prior to and during exposures, blood pressure and cardiac rate and rhythm (EKG) were monitored. Pulmonary function, as indi... 

Whole body Variety and number of animals Chronic studies possible Minimum restraint Large historical database Controllable environment Minimum stress Minimum labor Messy Multiple routes of exposure skin, eyes, oral Variability of dose Cannot pulse exposure easily Poor contact between animals and investigators Capital intensive Inefficient compound usage Difficult to monitor animals during exposure Cleaning effluent air Inert materials Losses of test material Even distribution in space Sampling Animal care Observation Noise, vibration, humidity Air temperature Safe exhaust Loading Reliability... 

---