Search

The purpose of this work was the non-destructive characterization by gamma spectrometry of a collector's item in which uranium was used as a colouring agent. Such characterization was based on the calculation of the counting efficiency as a function of energy using the LabSOCS software from Canberra Industries. The activity concentrations obtained for the uranium isotopes were verified: i) from the measurement of two different positions of the test piece, ii) from the indirect calculation of the percentage by mass of U 3 O 8 (wt%) and iii) from the ambient dose equivalent rate H *(10) using the MCNP code. The activity concentrations obtained for 238U (9031 ± 2919 Bq kg−1) and 235U (472 ± 23 Bq kg−1) led to the conclusion that it was natural uranium. The value of the rate of ambient dose equivalent H *(10) in contact was 390 nSv h−1, which corresponds to twice the natural background. The U 3 O 8 content obtained was 0.213 ± 0.013%. • LabSOCS correctly calculates the efficiency in collectible items. • The H *(10) value was consistent with the activity concentrations of the U isotopes. • The content of U 3 O 8 did not differ from the usual in this type of material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Current advancements in fields of medical sciences resulted in an increase of imaging examinations with a use of ionising radiation. Such increase leads to justified concerns about its possible consequences. Aim. Assessment of awareness and level of knowledge of medicine students in terms of ionising radiation Material and methods. Statistical analysis of 207 surveys of medical students from University of Medical Sciences in Poznan (UMP), Poland with use of Statistica software Results. There was no significant difference between the results of the assessment related to gender, year of studies or attendance to radiology classes. Conclusions. Students level of knowledge about the ionising radiation was unsatisfactory. A change in training program can be a benefit for patients and physicians.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has sustained interest in radiological protection in computed tomography (CT), and ICRP Publications 87 and 102 focused on the management of patient doses in CT and multi-detector CT (MDCT) respectively. ICRP forecasted and ‘sounded the alarm’ on increasing patient doses in CT, and recommended actions for manufacturers and users. One of the approaches was that safety is best achieved when it is built into the machine, rather than left as a matter of choice for users. In view of upcoming challenges posed by newer systems that use cone beam geometry for CT (CBCT), and their widened usage, often by untrained users, a new ICRP task group has been working on radiological protection issues in CBCT. Some of the issues identified by the task group are: lack of standardisation of dosimetry in CBCT; the false belief within the medical and dental community that CBCT is a ‘light’, low-dose CT whereas mobile CBCT units and newer applications, particularly C-arm CT in interventional procedures, involve higher doses; lack of training in radiological protection among clinical users; and lack of dose information and tracking in many applications. This paper provides a summary of approaches used in CT and MDCT, and preliminary information regarding work just published for radiological protection in CBCT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recently reinforced the international system of radiological protection, initially focused on humans, by identifying principles of environmental protection and proposing a framework for assessing impacts of ionising radiation on non-human species, based on a reference flora and fauna approach. For this purpose, ICRP developed dosimetric models for a set of Reference Animals and Plants, which are representative of flora and fauna in different environments (terrestrial, freshwater, marine), and produced criteria based on information on radiation effects, with the aim of evaluating the level of potential or actual radiological impacts, and as an input for decision making. The approach developed by ICRP for flora and fauna is consistent with the approach used to protect humans. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) includes considerations on the protection of the environment in its safety standards, and is currently developing guidelines to assess radiological impacts based on the aforementioned ICRP approach. This paper presents the method developed by IAEA, in a series of meetings with international experts, to enable assessment of the radiological impact to the marine environment in connection with the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 (London Convention 1972). This method is based on IAEA’s safety standards and ICRP’s recommendations, and was presented in 2013 for consideration by representatives of the contracting parties of the London Convention 1972; it was approved for inclusion in its procedures, and is in the process of being incorporated into guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) statement on tissue reactions, issued by the Commission in April 2011, reviewed epidemiological evidence and suggested that there are some tissue reactions where threshold doses are or may be lower than those previously considered. For the lens of the eye, the threshold is now considered to be 0.5 Gy. The absorbed dose threshold for circulatory disease in the heart and brain may be as low as 0.5 Gy. These values can be reached in some patients during interventional cardiology or neuroradiology procedures. They may also be of concern for repeated computed tomography examinations of the head. The new thresholds should be considered in optimisation strategies for clinical procedures, especially in patients likely to require repeated interventions. The new dose thresholds also affect occupational protection for operators and staff. Some operators do not protect their eyes or their brain adequately. After several years of work without proper protection, the absorbed doses to the lens of the eye and the brain of staff can exceed 0.5 Gy. More research is needed to understand the biological effects of cumulative incident air kerma and the instantaneous air kerma rates currently used in medical imaging. The new thresholds, and the need for specific occupational dosimetry related to lens doses, should be considered in radiation protection programmes, and should be included in the education and training of professionals involved in fluoroscopy guided procedures and computed tomography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to the 2011–2017 strategic plan, Committee 3 develops recommendations and guidance for protection of patients, staff, and the public against radiation exposure when ionising radiation is used for medical diagnosis, therapy, or biomedical research. This paper presents an overview of the work that Committee 3 has accomplished in recent years and describes its current work. The International Commission on Radiological Protection reports dealing with radiological protection in medicine from 2000 to the present cover topics on education and training in radiological protection; preventing accidental exposures in radiation therapy; doses to patients from radiopharmaceuticals; radiation safety aspects of brachytherapy; release of patients after therapy with unsealed radionuclides; and managing radiation dose in interventional radiology, digital radiology, computed tomography, paediatrics, cardiology, and other medical specialties. Current work deals with radiological protection in ion beam therapy, occupational protection in brachytherapy, justification in imaging, radiological protection in cone-beam computed tomography, occupational protection in interventional procedures, diagnostic reference levels for diagnostic and interventional imaging, and an update of an earlier publication on doses to patients and staff from radiopharmaceuticals. Committee 3 is also involved in preparation of a document on effective dose and its use in medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is a premier international organisation for the protection of workers, patients, and the public against ionising radiation. It was established in 1928 to advance, for the public benefit, the science of radiological protection, with its work in the early years focusing mainly on occupational exposure in medicine. The name ‘International Commission on Radiological Protection’ was adopted in 1950 to reflect the wider and more diverse areas of work that were being undertaken. ICRP has published 13 sets of general recommendations and these form the basis of radiation safety standards worldwide. ICRP consists of the Main Commission and five standing committees. There are 84 official members of the Main Commission and Committees 1–5, but more than 200 members who work with ICRP through its task groups. ICRP has developed a strategic plan for 2011–2017 and has made progress with some of its initiatives. These include establishing close liaison with other radiological protection organisations, responding to the needs and concerns of the radiological protection community, and identifying areas of work that require scrutiny of science and practice to produce relevant recommendations. This strategy means that ICRP will continue to be a leader in radiological protection for many years to come. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advanced imaging technology has opened new horizons for medical diagnostics and improved patient care. However, many procedures are unjustified and do not provide a net benefit. An area of particular concern is the unnecessary use of radiation when clinical evaluation or other imaging modalities could provide an accurate diagnosis. Referral criteria for medical imaging are consensus statements based on the best-available evidence to assist the decision-making process when choosing the best imaging procedure for a given patient. Although they are advisory rather than compulsory, physicians should have good reasons for deviation from these criteria. Voluntary use of referral criteria has shown limited success compared with integration into clinical decision support systems. These systems support good medical practice, can improve health service delivery, and foster safer, more efficient, fair, cost-effective care, thus contributing to the strengthening of health systems. Justification of procedures and optimisation of protection, the two pillars of radiological protection in health care, are implicit in the notion of good medical practice. However, some health professionals are not familiar with these principles, and have low awareness of radiological protection aspects of justification. A stronger collaboration between radiation protection and healthcare communities could contribute to improve the radiation protection culture in medical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In recent years it has been confirmed that computed tomography is the image study that contributes the most to the population dose. Radiology services have a responsibility to implement actions to limitthe risks and maximize the benefits ofsuch studies. Objective: Describe the objectives of a Patient Radiological Protection Program in tomography services, based on recommendations of expert organizations and supported by the regulatory framework for radiology in Mexico. Methodology: We conducted a literature reviewto identify recommendations by scientific and academic entities with authority in matters of radiological safety. We analyzed the regulatory framework in Mexico to identify how it correlates with international recommendations. Results: The International Commission Radiological Protection and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are reference organizations which study the risks of medical exposure to radiation and promote its regulation. The Fundamental Safety Principles are one ofthe IAEA's basic declarations which should be included in any Radiological Protec-tion Program for patients. Most of these principles have corollaries in Mexican regulations and others require specific actions by the persons responsible for tomography services. Conclusion: A Patient Radiological Protection Program in tomography services should include systematic actions relating to rationale, optimization, recording, and analysis of dose and risk mitigation and preven-tion. The involvement of senior management, radiologists, residents, technicians, and physicists is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Special aspects of radiation protection maintenance at a drawing-board stage of the "Shelter" Object (ShO) transformation into environmentally safe system are shaped in the article. Information is provided on the basis of analysis of design plans and specifications both with project paperwork from activities at the ShO in 2002-2015 on accordance to requirements of the Ukrainian health legislation in the field of radiation hygiene regulations. Specific features of radiation factors at the ShO were identified accounting their emergency origination. Relevancy of assessment of a range of activity types and technologies impact on radiation situation in the operation environment was reviewed and substantiated. General characteristics of radiation exposure and resulting doses in personnel under the activity execution are provided followed by the requirements to estimates of anticipated radiation doses. Features and peculiarities of application of the Ukrainian health legislation in a field of radiation hygienic regulations are reviewed in a view of meeting the requirements of NRBU-97, NRBU-97/D-2000, OSPU-2005, SPORO-85, SP AES-88 and other health legislative regulatory documents under conditions of work at the ShO. By the virtue of analysis of radiation hygienic factors at the ShO the special aspects of choice of individual and collective radiological protection arrangements for personnel were identified, namely the individual protective gear and respiratory protection equipment, shielding, decontamination, dust suppression, ventilation, sanitary pass control, sanitary barriers, scope and types of radiological control, setting the design levels of radiological environment parameters, criteria for the most safe options (technologies) of work execution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: While working with cyclotrons used for the production of radiopharmaceuticals, workers can experience significant exposure to the adverse effects of ionizing radiation. The aim of this paper was to determine the typical level of such exposure received by such personnel while servicing cyclotrons., Material and Methods: Exposure was assessed using TLD detectors placed in an anthropomorphic phantom, as well as dose meter to determine whole body and eye lens exposure. The phantom was placed in locations receiving the greatest exposure to ionizing radiation during service activities. The time spent by employees during servicing was assessed based on routine visits by service technicians. The obtained results were compared with readings of detectors worn by employees during service activities., Results: The highest equivalent doses in the thoracic area were found to be received by the lungs (211.16 μSv/year). In the head and neck area, the highest dose was measured in the eye lens (3410 μSv/year). The effective dose for the whole body was found to be 1154.4 μSv/year, based on the phantom, and 149 μSv per service visit (1192 μSv/year), based on the dose meters carried by the workers., Conclusions: Service workers are exposed to significant doses of ionizing radiation, representing a clear radiological protection issue. To reduce exposure to eye lenses, it is recommended to use protective goggles when working with highly-radioactive elements. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2022;35(6):753-60., (This work is available in Open Access model and licensed under a CC BY-NC 3.0 PL license.)

Interventional cardiology provides indisputable benefits for patients but uses a substantial amount of ionising radiation. The diagnostic reference level (DRL) is the tool recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection to optimise imaging procedures. In this work, a review of studies dealing with radiation dose or recommending DRL values for interventional cardiology since 2010 is presented, providing quantitative and qualitative results. There are many published papers on coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention. The DRL values compiled for different continental regions are different: the DRL for CA is about 35 Gy cm 2 for Europe and 83 Gy cm 2 for North America. These differences emphasise the need to establish national DRLs considering different social and/or economic factors and the harmonisation of the survey methodology. Surveys with a large amount of data collected with the help of dose management systems provide more reliable information with less chance of statistical bias than those with a small amount of data. The complexity of procedures and improvements in technology are important factors that affect the radiation dose delivered to patients. There is a need for additional data on structural and electrophysiological procedures. The analysis of paediatric procedures is especially difficult because some studies present results split into age bands and others into weight bands. Diagnostic procedures are better described, but there is a great variety of therapeutic procedures with different DRL values (up to a factor of nine) and these require a dedicated review., (© 2022 Society for Radiological Protection. Published on behalf of SRP by IOP Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: To obtain a better understanding on how non-human biota are affected by exposure to environmental radioactivity, it is essential to link observed effects to a correct estimate of absorbed ionising radiation dose. Current wildlife dose rate and risk assessment tools are not set up to assess changes in dose rate during organism development. This paper presents a dosimetry model for assessing dose rate and absorbed dose during seedling development of the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana. We included growth and radionuclide absorption dynamics into the dose calculations. This model was subsequently used to compare the dose and dose rate calculations for three radionuclides, 241Am (α-radiation), 90Sr (β-radiation) and 133Ba (γ-radiation), in a standard exposure scenario. We show that growth influences dose and dose rate and that this influence depends on the radionuclide and the organ involved. The use of dynamic dosimetry models greatly improves the dose calculations for effect studies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The benefits of cardiac imaging are immense, and modern medicine requires the extensive and versatile use of a variety of cardiac imaging techniques. Cardiologists are responsible for a large part of the radiation exposures every person gets per year from all medical sources. Therefore, they have a particular responsibility to avoid unjustified and non-optimized use of radiation, but sometimes are imperfectly aware of the radiological dose of the examination they prescribe or practice. This position paper aims to summarize the current knowledge on radiation effective doses (and risks) related to cardiac imaging procedures. We have reviewed the literature on radiation doses, which can range from the equivalent of 1–60 milliSievert (mSv) around a reference dose average of 15 mSv (corresponding to 750 chest X-rays) for a percutaneous coronary intervention, a cardiac radiofrequency ablation, a multidetector coronary angiography, or a myocardial perfusion imaging scintigraphy. We provide a European perspective on the best way to play an active role in implementing into clinical practice the key principle of radiation protection that: ‘each patient should get the right imaging exam, at the right time, with the right radiation dose’. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Highlights: [•] Strength of Concretes with EAF slags is higher than that of conventional concrete. [•] Small attenuation difference between concretes with EAF slags and those with barite. [•] Attenuation of concretes with EAF slags is valid for radiological protection. [•] The friability of barite compromises the mechanical properties of concrete. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

ABSTRACT Recent developments have seen the expansion of the system of radiological protection for humans to one including protection of the environment against detrimental effects of radiation exposure, although a fully developed framework for integration of human and ecological risk assessment for radionuclides is only at an early stage. In the context of integration, significant differences exist between assessment methodologies for humans and the environment in terms of transfer, exposure, and dosimetry. The aim of this elaboration was to explore possible implications of the simplifications made within the system of environmental radiological protection in terms of the efficacy and robustness of dose-rate predictions. A comparison was conducted between human radiological assessment and environmental radiological assessment for an anthropomorphic surrogate, the results for which, produced by both the environmental and human-oriented risk assessment systems, were critically compared and contrasted. The adopted approach split the calculations into several parts, these being 1) physical transfer in an ecosystem, 2) transfer to humans, 3) internal doses to humans, and 4) external doses to humans. The calculations were carried out using both a human radiological assessment and ecological risk assessment system for the same surrogate. The results of this comparison provided indications as to where the 2 systems are amenable to possible integration and where such integration may prove difficult. Initial stage transport models seem to be an obvious component amenable for integration, although complete integration is arguably unattainable as the differences between endpoints mean that the relevant outputs from the models will not be the same. For the transfer and dosimetry components of 2 typical methodologies, it seems that the efficacy of the environmental system is radionuclide-dependent, the predictions given by the environmental system for 90Sr and 60Co being unsatisfactory and those for 239Pu and 210Po being evidently poor. Integration in this context might take the form of exploring the biokinetic models developed for humans with regard to selected animals and radionuclides. External dose assessment for environmental and human systems provide results for the surrogate that correspond quite closely providing an indication that integration in this regard is perhaps unnecessary. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2014;10:125-132. © 2013 SETAC [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Statistics highlight the increasing number of medical equipments and procedures using ionizing radiation in Romania. Some of these procedures involve high doses, the exposures may be repeated, and recording and saving information on patient doses are still inadequate, despite the existing legal provisions; in this context, recent studies confirm that practitioners are still reluctant to refuse unjustified examinations, and the issue of radiation protection of the patient becomes an actual public health problem. Public health specialists are confronted with the dilemma of the alternatives to solve existing problems, between a new excessive regulation or better information, assisted by control and the mechanisms of internal and external clinical audit, not as punitive means, but appealing to the professional deontology of the professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Statistics highlight the increasing number of medical equipments and procedures using ionizing radiation in Romania. Some of these procedures involve high doses, the exposures may be repeated, and recording and saving information on patient doses are still inadequate, despite the existing legal provisions; in this context, recent studies confirm that practitioners are still reluctant to refuse unjustified examinations, and the issue of radiation protection of the patient becomes an actual public health problem. Public health specialists are confronted with the dilemma of the alternatives to solve existing problems, between a new excessive regulation or better information, assisted by control and the mechanisms of internal and external clinical audit, not as punitive means, but appealing to the professional deontology of the professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In debates about nuclear controversy, the issue of occupational safety in radioactive facilities is rarely foregrounded; it has historically been relegated to second place compared to the attention given to potential harm to the general population. Aiming for, at least, partially filling this historiographical gap, this article deals with the development of occupational radiological protection in Spain under the dictatorship of General Franco (1939-1975). It covers the rise of radiological protection measures on an international level and the subsequent development of legislation in the case of Spain, a process that paralleled the growth of the nation's nuclear program. Finally, it explores the main evidence of the impact of ionizing radiation on Spain's working population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The radiation doses to humans resulting from a potential release of radionuclides from a geological repository for long-lived waste are assessed over tens or even hundreds of thousands of years. Ingestion is expected to be the major exposure pathway, and the group with the highest exposures will be those that consume the most contaminated food. In this paper, we characterize the group of individuals with the highest exposures by considering the physical and biological characteristics of the contaminated area and human requirements for energy and nutrients. We then calculate intake rates based on land-use scenarios drawn from self-sustained communities spanning prehistoric times to an industrial-age agrarian culture. The approach is illustrated by simulating groundwater release of four radionuclides to an expected discharge area. We argue that the derived intake rates may serve as credible bounding cases when projected doses are evaluated for compliance with regulatory criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We are exposed to two sources of radiation, natural or background radiation which comes from cosmic space and from other natural sources (primitive materials of our planet) and another artificial (industrial, produced by radiological procedures, warfare, or accidents in handling radioactive substances). Radiobiology is the science that studies phenomena produced in life forms following absorption of energy from ionizing radiation. Radiological protection is a tool to manage healthcare measures against risks produced by use of ionizing radiation, both for persons and for the environment. The objectives of radiological protection and safety are: prevent recognized and predictable harmful (deterministic) effects of ionizing radiation and limit the stochastic effects to acceptable maximums. Our standard (NOM-229-SSA1-2002) is based on the recommendations of the International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP) of 1977. The acceptable annual limits of radiation are: occupational 50 mSv and public 5 mSv. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several studies have revealed that interventional radiography procedures performed in cardiology departments are high dose techniques. In this study, effective dose of cardiologists working in hospitals Catheterisation Laboratories (CATHLABs) in Mashhad city have been measured during Coronary Angiography (CA) and Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty (PTCA) procedures. In order to measure the dose per procedure and to estimate monthly effective dose of cardiologists, Electronic Personal Dosimeters (EPDs) were worn by 33 cardiologists over the apron on the collar. Mean effective dose of cardiologists per procedure was equal to 2.7 μSv (range: 0.3-14.3 μSv) for CA and 6.4 μSv (range: 1.3-27.5 μSv) for PTCA procedures. Mean monthly effective dose in cardiologists was equal to 158.3 μSv (range: 8.3-1050 μSv). According to the data obtained in this study the effective dose estimated for all cardiologists was lower than the monthly limits recommended by International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dose limits recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection have undergone considerable changes in the course of the past 90 years, and different arguments have been put forward for their justification. This has been largely due to new insights of radiation research, but changing perceptions of the related ethical values have also played a role. The current paper reviews important stages in this development and attempts to derive some implications for the Commission's next general recommendations. Above all, it suggests that it is essential to present clear and consistent justification strategies for dose limits (and related values), compatible with the core values of the system of radiological protection, especially prudence and justice., (© 2022 Society for Radiological Protection. Published on behalf of SRP by IOP Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.)

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has embarked on a process to review and revise the current System of Radiological Protection ('the System'). To stimulate discussion, the ICRP published two open-access articles: one on aspects of the System that might require review, and another on research that might improve the scientific foundation of the System. Building on these articles, the ICRP organized a Workshop on the Future of Radiological Protection as an opportunity to engage in the review and revision of the System. This digital workshop took place from 14 October-3 November 2021 and included 20 live-streamed and 43 on-demand presentations. Approximately 1500 individuals from 100 countries participated. Based on the subjects covered by the presentations, this summary is organized into four broad areas: the scientific basis, concepts and application of the System; and the role of the ICRP. Some of the key topics that emerged included the following: classification of radiation-induced effects; adverse outcome pathway methodologies; better understanding of the dose-response relationship; holistic and reasonable approaches to optimization of protection; radiological protection of the environment; ethical basis of the System; clarity, consistency and communication of the System; application of the System in medicine and application of the principles of justification and optimization of protection., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)

Abstract: Modern radiation protection is based on the principles of justification, limitation, and optimisation. Assessment of radiation risks for individuals or groups of individuals is, however, not a primary objective of radiological protection. The implementation of the principles of limitation and optimisation requires an appropriate quantification of radiation exposure. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has introduced effective dose as the principal radiological protection quantity to be used for setting and controlling dose limits for stochastic effects in the regulatory context, and for the practical implementation of the optimisation principle. Effective dose is the tissue weighted sum of radiation weighted organ and tissue doses of a reference person from exposure to external irradiations and internal emitters. The specific normalised values of tissue weighting factors are defined by ICRP for individual tissues, and used as an approximate age- and sex-averaged representation of the relative contribution of each tissue to the radiation detriment of stochastic effects from whole-body low-linear energy transfer irradiations. The rounded values of tissue and radiation weighting factors are chosen by ICRP on the basis of available scientific data from radiation epidemiology and radiation biology, and they are therefore subject to adjustment as new scientific information becomes available. Effective dose is a single, risk-related dosimetric quantity, used prospectively for planning and optimisation purposes, and retrospectively for demonstrating compliance with dose limits and constraints. In practical radiation protection, it has proven to be extremely useful. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Committee 3 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is concerned with protection in medicine, and develops recommendations and guidance on the protection of patients, staff, and the public against radiation exposure in medicine. This paper presents an overview of the work of Committee 3 over recent years, and the work in progress agreed at the last annual meeting in Bethesda, MD in October 2011. The reports published by ICRP dealing with radiological protection in medicine in the last 10years cover topics on: education and training in radiological protection; preventing accidental exposures in radiation therapy; dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals; radiation safety aspects of brachytherapy; release of patients after therapy with unsealed radionuclides; managing patient dose in digital radiology and computed tomography; avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures; pregnancy and medical radiation; and diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging. Three new reports will be published in the coming months dealing with aspects of radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures outside imaging departments; cardiology; and paediatric radiology. The work in progress agreed by Committee 3 is also described. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]