Abstract
The system of protection established by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) provides a robust framework for ionizing radiation exposure justification, optimization, and dose limitation. The system is built upon fundamental concepts of a reference person, defined in ICRP Publication 89, and the radiation protection quantity effective dose, defined in ICRP Publication 103. For external exposures to radionuclide-contaminated soil, values of the organ dose rate coefficient (Gy/s per Bq/m2) and effective dose rate coefficient (Sv/s per Bq/m2) have been computed by several authors and national laboratories using ICRP-compliant reference phantoms—both stylized and voxelized. These coefficients are of great value in post-accident exposure assessments as seen in Japan following the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station disaster. Questions arise, however, among the general public regarding the accuracy of organ and effective dose estimates based upon reference phantom methodologies, especially for those individuals with height and/or total body mass that differ modestly or even substantially from the nearest age-matched reference person. In this pilot study, this issue is explored through use of the extended 351-member UF/NCI hybrid phantom library in which values of organ and detriment-weighted dose rate coefficients are computed for sex/height/mass-specific phantoms, and systematically compared to their values of the effective dose rate coefficient computed using corresponding reference phantoms. Results are given for monoenergetic photons, and then for some 33 different radionuclides, with all dose rate coefficient data provided in a series of electronic annexes. For environmentally relevant radionuclides such as 89Sr, 90Sr, 137Cs, and 131I, percent differences between the detriment-weighted dose rate coefficient computed using non-reference and the effective dose rate coefficient computed using reference phantoms vary only ± 5% for young children approximated by the reference 1-year-old phantom. With increased body size and age, the range of percent differences in these two quantities increases to + 7% to − 14% for the reference 5-year-old, to + 10% to − 27% for the reference 10-year-old, to + 33% to − 31% for the reference 15-year-old, and to + 15% to − 40% for male and female adults.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Two versions of the set of annexes are available. The full version may be requested from the corresponding author. An abbreviated set—giving data for only the members of the UF/NCI phantom library—may be found on the journal website accompanying this article.
References
BEIR (2005) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII—phase 2. National Research Council, Washington, DC
Bellamy MB, Hiller MM, Dewji SA, Veinot KG, Leggett RW, Eckerman KF, Easterly CE, Hertel NE (2016) Comparison of monoenergetic photon organ dose rate coefficients for stylized and voxel phantoms submerged in air. Radiat Prot Dosim 172:367–374
Bellamy MB, Veinot KG, Hiller MM, Dewji SA, Eckerman KF, Easterly CE, Hertel NE, Leggett RW (2017) Effective dose rate coefficients for immersions in radioactive air and water. Radiat Prot Dosim 174:275–286
Bolch W, Lee C, Wayson M, Johnson P (2010) Hybrid computational phantoms for medical dose reconstruction. Radiat Environ Biophys 49:155–168
Bolch WE, Petoussi-Henss N, Paquet F, Harrison J (2016) ICRP dose coefficients: computational development and current status. Ann ICRP 45:156–177
Cristy M (1980) Mathematical phantoms representing children of various ages for use in estimates of internal dose. National Laboratory, Oak Ridge
Cristy M, Eckerman KF (1987) Specific absorbed fractions of energy at various ages from internal photon sources. National Laboratory, Oak Ridge
de Gonzalez AB, Apostoaei AI, Veiga LHS, Rajaraman P, Thomas BA, Hoffman FO, Gilbert E, Land C (2012) RadRAT: a radiation risk assessment tool for lifetime cancer risk projection. J Radiol Prot 32:205–222
Dewji SA, Bales K, Griffin K, Lee C, Hiller M (2018) Age-dependent comparison of monoenergetic photon organ and effective dose coefficients for pediatric stylized and voxel phantoms submerged in air. Phys Med Biol 63:175019
EPA (1993) Federal Guidance Report No. 12—External exposure to radionuclides in air, water, and soil. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (EPA-402-R-93-081)
EPA (2019) Federal Guidance Report No. 15: External exposure to radionuclides in air, water, and soil. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
Geyer AM, O’Reilly S, Lee C, Long DJ, Bolch WE (2014) The UF/NCI family of hybrid computational phantoms representing the current US population of male and female children, adolescents, and adults—application to CT dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 59:5225–5242
Harrison J (2018) The mandate and work of ICRP Committee 2 on doses from radiation exposure. Ann ICRP 47:9–19
Hiller M, Dewji SA (2017) Comparison of monoenergetic photon organ dose rate coefficients for the female stylized and voxel phantoms submerged in air. Radiat Prot Dosim 175:336–343
ICRP (1979) ICRP Publication 30, Part 1: Limits for intakes of radionuclides by workers. Ann ICRP 3:1–116
ICRP (2002) ICRP Publication 89: Basic anatomical and physiological data for use in radiological protection—reference values. Ann ICRP 32:1–277
ICRP (2007) ICRP Publication 103: Recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. Ann ICRP 37:1–332
ICRP (2008) ICRP Publication 107: Nuclear decay data for dosimetric calculations. Ann ICRP 38:1–26
ICRP (2009) ICRP Publication 110: Adult reference computational phantoms. Ann ICRP 39:1–165
ICRP (2010) ICRP Publication 116: Conversion coefficients for radiological protection quantities for external radiation exposures. Ann ICRP 40:1–257
ICRP (2015) ICRP Publication 130: Occupational intakes of radionuclides, part 1. Ann ICRP 44:1–188
ICRP. Dose coefficients for external exposures to environmental sources. Ann ICRP (in press)
ICRU (1994) ICRU Report No. 53: Gamma-ray spectrometry in the environment. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda
Kim CH, Yeom YS, Nguyen TT, Wang ZJ, Kim HS, Han MC, Lee JK, Zankl M, Petoussi-Henss N, Bolch WE, Lee C, Chung BS (2016) The reference phantoms: voxel vs polygon. Ann ICRP 45:188–201
Kramer R, Zankl M, Williams G, Drexler G (1982) The calculation of dose from external photon exposures using reference human phantoms and Monte Carlo methods. Part I: the male (ADAM) and female (EVA) adult mathematical phantoms. Gesellschaft für Strahlenund Umweltforschung, Munich
Lee C, Lodwick D, Hurtado J, Pafundi D, Williams JL, Bolch WE (2010) The UF family of reference hybrid phantoms for computational radiation dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 55:339–363
Petoussi-Henss N, Schlattl H, Zankl M, Endo A, Saito K (2012) Organ doses from environmental exposures calculated using voxel phantoms of adults and children. Phys Med Biol 57:5679–5713
Saito K, Ishiqure N, Petoussi-Henss N, Schlattl H (2012) Effective dose conversion coefficients for radionuclides exponentially distributed in the ground. Radiat Environ Biophys 51:411–423
Sato T, Niita K, Matsuda N, Hashimoto S, Iwamoto Y, Noda S, Ogawa T, Iwase H, Nakashima H, Fukahori T, Okumura K, Kai T, Chiba S, Furuta T, Sihver L (2013) Particle and heavy ion transport code system, PHITS, version 2.52. J Nucl Sci Technol 50:913–923
Satoh D, Endo A, Bolch W, Lee C (2016) Age-dependent dose conversion coefficients for external exposure to radioactive cesium in soil. J Nucl Sci Technol 53:69–81
UNSCEAR (2006) Effects of ionizing radiation—Annex A: epidemiological studies of radiation and cancer. United Nations, New York
UNSCEAR (2013) Sources, effects, and risks of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 2013 Report—volume I: Scientific Annex A: Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (United Nations Scientific Commission on the Effects of Atomic Radiation)
Veinot KG, Eckerman KF, Bellamy MB, Hiller MM, Dewji SA, Easterly CE, Hertel NE, Manger R (2017) Effective dose rate coefficients for exposure to contaminated soil. Radiat Environ Biophys 56:255–267
Xu XG (2014) An exponential growth of computational phantom research in radiation protection, imaging, and radiotherapy: a review of the fifty-year history. Phys Med Biol 59:R233–R302
Yoo SJ, Jang HK, Lee JK, Noh S, Cho G (2013a) External dose-rate conversion factors of radionuclides for air submersion, ground surface contamination and water immersion based on the new ICRP dosimetric setting. Radiat Prot Dosim 156:7–24
Yoo SJ, Lee JK, Kim EH, Jeong KH, Cho G (2013b) Groundshine dose–rate conversion factors of soil contaminated to different depths. Radiat Prot Dosim 157:407–429
Zankl M, Veit R, Williams G, Schneider K, Fendel H, Petoussi N, Drexler G (1988) The construction of computer tomographic phantoms and their application in radiology and radiation protection. Radiat Environ Biophys 27:153–164
Zubal IG, Harrell CR, Smith EO, Rattner Z, Gindi G, Hoffer PB (1994) Computerized three-dimensional segmented human anatomy. Med Phys 21:299–302
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Contract 5000-68862 from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and its Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) with the University of Florida. Additional support was provided by the German government via BMU (Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety) and BfS (Federal Office for Radiation Protection).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kofler, C., Domal, S., Satoh, D. et al. Organ and detriment-weighted dose rate coefficients for exposure to radionuclide-contaminated soil considering body morphometries that differ from reference conditions: adults and children. Radiat Environ Biophys 58, 477–492 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-019-00812-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-019-00812-2