ZEMEDI-10638; No.

of Pages 7 ARTICLE IN PRESS

ORIGINALARBEIT

Dose rate constants for the quantity Hp(3) for frequently used
radionuclides in nuclear medicine
Bastian Szermerski 1,∗ , Iris Bruchmann 1 , Rolf Behrens 2 , Lilli Geworski 1
1
Department for Radiation Protection and Medical Physics, Medical School Hannover
2
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig

Received 1 June 2015; accepted 23 November 2015

Abstract Dosisleistungskonstanten für die Messgröße

According to recent studies, the human eye lens is more
sensitive to ionising radiation than previously assumed.
Therefore, the dose limit for personnel occupationally
exposed to ionising radiation will be lowered from cur-
rently 150 mSv to 20 mSv per year. Currently, no data
base for a reliable estimation of the dose to the lens of the
eye is available for nuclear medicine. Furthermore, the
dose is usually not monitored. The aim of this work was to
determine dose rate constants for the quantity Hp (3), which
is supposed to estimate the dose to the lens of the eye. For
this, Hp (3)-dosemeters were fixed to an Alderson Phan-
tom at different positions. The dosemeters were exposed to
radiation from nuclides typically used in nuclear medicine
in their geometries analog to their application in nuclear
medicine, e.g. syringe or vial. The results show that the
handling of high-energy beta (i.e. electron or positron)
emitters may lead to a relevant dose to the lens of the
eye. For low-energy beta emitters and gamma emitters, an
exceeding of the lowered dose limit seems to be unlikely.
Hp (3) für häufig eingesetzte Nuklide in der
Nuklearmedizin
Zusammenfassung
Die Augenlinse ist nach aktuellem Stand der Wissenschaft
strahlensensibler als bislang angenommen. Der Grenzwert
für beruflich strahlenexponierte Personen wird künftig von
150 mSv/a auf 20 mSv/a abgesenkt. In der Nuklearmedi-
zin ist weder eine hinreichende Datenlage verfügbar, aus
welcher sich belastbare Dosiswerte abschätzen lassen,
noch wird die Organdosis in der Regel messtechnisch
erfasst. Das Ziel dieser Arbeit war die messtechnische Be-
stimmung von Dosisleistungskonstanten für die Messgröße
Hp (3), mit welchen eine Abschätzung der Augen-
linsendosis ermöglicht werden soll. Hierzu wurden
Hp (3)-Dosimeter an einem Aldersonphantom an ver-
schiedenen Trageorten befestigt. Als Strahlenquellen
wurden Spritzen oder Vials verwendet, wie sie in der
Nuklearmedizin verwendet werden. Die Messergebnisse
zeigen, dass speziell beim Umgang mit hochenergetis-
cher Betastrahlung (d. h. Elektronen oder Positro-
nen) relevante Dosisbeiträge entstehen können, und
dass für niederenergetische Betastrahler und Gammas-
trahler kaum mit einer Überschreitung des zukünf-
tig herabgesetzten Grenzwertes zu rechnen ist.

Keywords: Ocular lens, nuclear medicine, cataract, Schlüsselwörter: Augenlinse, Nuklearmedizin, Katarakt,
dose rate constant Dosisleistungskonstante

∗ Corresponding author: Bastian Szermerski, Department for Radiation Protection and Medical Physics, Medical School Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1,

30625 Hannover. Tel.: +05115324028; Fax: +05115322676.

E-mail: szermerski.bastian@mh-hannover.de (B. Szermerski).

Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.zemedi.2015.11.003
www.elsevier.com/locate/zemedi
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 B. Szermerski et al. / Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

1 Introduction spectrum. In case only positrons are meant this is explicitly

The aim of radiation protection for the eye lens is to avoid
cataract formation caused by ionising radiation. Currently, a
dose limit of 150 mSv/a applies for occupationally exposed
persons [1,2]. According to studies within the last decade (see
references in [3]), the human eye lens is more sensitive to
ionising radiation than previously assumed. A re-evaluation of
epidemiological studies supports the assumption that possibly
a threshold dose of about 0.5 Gy cumulative dose is required
for the induction of a cataract; however, it is unclear, whether
such a threshold exists at all [3].
Hence, the International Commission on Radiological Pro-
tection (ICRP) has recommended a reduction of the dose limit
[4] to 100 mSv cumulative dose in five years. In addition,
a dose of 50 mSv/a shall not be exceeded in a single year.
Following this recommendation, the Council of the European
Union has laid down these new limits in the Directive 2013/59 /
EURATOM as of 05.12.2013 [5] which has to be implemented
into national law within a period of four years in member states
of the EURATOM treaty.
The impending reduction of the dose limit for the eye lens
requires a reassessment of individual exposure conditions for
occupationally exposed personnel. As the eye lens is located
behind the cornea and anterior chamber in a total depth of
about 3 mm, the quantities Hp (10) (usually used as a measure
of the effective dose) and Hp (0.07) (usually used as a mea-
sure of the local skin dose) do not seem to be appropriate
for estimating the dose to the lens of the eye. Instead, Hp (3)
should be used, at least in beta radiation fields. Hp (3) is the
dose at 3 mm depth in the human body below the point where
an eye dosemeter is worn (preferably as close as possible to
the eye). Thus, only radiation being able to penetrate 3 mm
of tissue (with an average density of 1 g/cm3 assumed) con-
tributes to Hp (3). Accordingly, Hp (0.07) and Hp (10) are the
dose in 0.07 and 10 mm tissue depth, respectively. However,
at present only few dosemeters for Hp (3) are available and,
at least in Germany, none is approved by regulation bodies.
Finally, in Germany the need for a special dosemeter is still
under discussion.
In nuclear medicine, a variety of different nuclides is in
use for the treatment of patients and for research purposes.
The lens of the eye of the medical staff is exposed to mixed
fields of photons, electrons and positrons over a broad energy
range. In most nuclear medicine departments and institutions,
the individual exposure of the eye lens is neither measured nor
calculated [6]. The estimation of doses to the lens of the eye has
been facilitated with the recent publication of tabulated dose
rate per activity values [7] (these are currently implemented in
a revision of reference [8]). This is, however, only applicable
to ␤− emitting radionuclides but not to ␤+ -emitters.
In this work the term “beta radiation” is used for both elec-
trons and positrons. Depending on the context, the term refers
to the whole spectrum emitted from a radionuclide, the frac-
tion of that spectrum reaching the detector or only a part of that
outlined.
The aim of this study is to determine dose rate constants for
nuclides often used in nuclear medicine utilising dosemeters
which allow the estimation of the dose to the lens of the eye
per activity and time interval at different working distances.
2 Methods
For simulating exposure conditions in nuclear medicine
facilities, measurements were performed with syringes
containing radiopharmaceuticals with the commonly used
radionuclides Tc-99m, Y-90, F-18 and Ga-68, and with an
I-131 capsule in an applicator. For simulating realistic geome-
tries and associated scattering effects on the skull and body, the
sources were positioned in front of an Alderson phantom [9],
which consists of tissue-equivalent material, at usual working
distances from 20 cm up to 50 cm. The phantom was placed
more than 1 m away from all room walls and other objects in
order to minimize scattering effects.
Dosemeters were attached to the phantom at possible wear-
ing positions, see figure 1. The exposure times and nuclide
activities were chosen such that the resulting dose is well
above the background level, which has also been determined
by the dosemeters. The radioactive sources were obtained
from the laboratory of the department of nuclear medicine and
the activities were comparable to typical activities applied to
patients, ranging from 3 MBq up to 3.7 GBq. The irradiation
times (between about 1 h and 90 h) were chosen to produce
a minimum dose of about 1 mSv (based on preliminary dose
estimates). The measured doses range between about 0.6 mSv
and 140 mSv (depending on the dosemeter’s distance and
wearing position).
For the measurements, Eye-D dosemeters with thermolu-
minescence detectors (TLD, Typ MCP-N, LiF:Mg,Cu,P) [10]
Figure 1. Alderson phantom with attached dosemeters.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Szermerski et al. / Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
Figure 2. Dose rate constants divided by the average value of the dosemeters on the phantom’s eyes.
were used. The Eye-D dosemeter has been developed within
the ORAMED-project (Optimization of RAdiation protection
for MEDical staff) [11]. It is designed for the measurement
of Hp (3) in photon radiation fields [11]. For this purpose, it
is equipped with a cap of about 3 mm tissue-equivalent mate-
rial (polyamide with a density of ρ = 1.13 g/cm3 [11]). That
means, beta radiation with an energy below a certain threshold
energy (around 700 keV) will not contribute to the dosemeter
readout. The dosemeters were provided and evaluated by the
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) in batches of
about 100 devices. To achieve a dose calibration, each batch
was subdivided into three groups:
1. About 10 dosemeters were irradiated at PTB with a well-
known dose of Hp (3) = 1 mSv using a Sr-90/Y-90 source.
This dose is traceable to the German primary standard for
beta dosimetry [12] and its extension to the quantity Hp (3)
[13].
2. Most of the other dosemeters were irradiated with any of
the radionuclides in question.
3. At least 10 dosemeters were not irradiated - their average
signal was subtracted from the readout of all dosemeters
from the batch (in order to obtain their net signal).
3
The net signal of the dosemeters irradiated with the radionu-
clides was then normalized to dose by dividing by the average
signal of the calibration dosemeters.
The dosemeters of the second group were fixed to the
phantom with a headband at typical wearing positions.
These positions are both sides of the temples, between
the eyes, and on the forehead (figure 2). Furthermore,
two dosemeters were placed directly on the phantom’s eye
positions.
The distance between the geometric center of the source
and the detector center of the dosemeters positioned on the
phantom’s eyes was varied to simulate typical working dis-
tances (20 cm, 27.5 cm, 35 cm, 42.5 cm and 50 cm). The
sources were positioned in front of the phantom at an angle of
0◦ . The energy dependent response (indicated dose divided by
true dose) of the dosemeters is taken into account by the appli-
cation of the correction factor knuclide . The values for knuclide
were determined from the energy dependence of the doseme-
ter response for photon and beta radiation, respectively [14],
taking into account the emissions of the nuclides [15]. Their
values are given in table 1.
For each nuclide and distance r, the dose rate per activity,
Ḣp (3)/A, was obtained via
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 B. Szermerski et al. / Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Table 1
Source characteristics and dose rate constants for the investigated nuclides and geometries (average of values measured at both eyes and at
all distances).
Nuclide Dominant emissions Geometry knuclide Γ (Hp (3)) in (mSv·m2 )/(GBq·h)

Radiation E␥ ; E␤,max P This work From photon Otto [19] e)

keV emission c)

Tc-99m ␥ 141 0.89 5 ml solution in 10 ml syringe 0.71 ± 0.04 0.021 ± 0.006 0.025 d) 0.026
u&s
I-131 ␤- 606 0.90 Capsule in applicator 0.66 ± 0.03 0.071 ± 0.021 0.069 d) 0.068
␥ 365 0.82 u&s
F-18 ␤+ 634 0.97 5 ml solution in 10 ml syringe 0.60 ± 0.03 0.169 ± 0.049 0.169 0.005 u f)
photons 511 a) 1.94 b) 0.169 s
Ga-68 ␤+ 1899 0.89 5 ml solution in 10 ml syringe 1.00 ± 0.05 0.499 ± 0.146 0.155 1.20 u
photons 511 a) 1.78 b) 0.161 s
Y-90 ␤- 2280 0.99 Microspheres in 5 ml syringe 1.00 ± 0.05 2.566 ± 0.762 — 2.35 u
0.0 s
a
) Annihilation photons.
b
) Two photons per annihilation.
c ) See equation (3) for details.
d ) For Tc-99m and I-131 all photon emissions above 10 keV are taken into account.
e ) “u” denotes “unshielded”, i.e. photons (without annihilation photons), ␤- , and ␤+ are taken into account;

“s” denotes “shielded”, i.e. photons including annihilation photons are taken into account.
No uncertainties are given by Otto.
f ) The value for the unshielded source is rather small as the contribution from the annihilation photons is missing.

Ḣp (3) G · knuclide Hp (3) · λ The standard uncertainties u of the input values were esti-
= τ = (1)
A  A0 · (1 − exp (−λ · τ)) mated as follows:
A (t) · dt
0
• uncertainty of the distance from the center of the detector
where material to the center of the source: maximum deviation
of 3 mm, by assuming a rectangular distribution follows
• ␶ is the irradiation time, u(r) = 3 √mm = 1.7 mm;
3
• A0 is the activity at the beginning of the irradiation, • uncertainty of the initial activity, determined with a radionu-
• A(t) = A0 · exp(-λ · t) is the activity at the time t, clide calibrator (MED VIK 202 Type 5051): u(A0 ) = 5 %;
• A is the average activity during the exposure time, • uncertainty of knuclide : maximum deviation of 15 %, by
• λ = ln(2)/T1/2 is the decay constant, assuming a Gaussian distribution follows u(knuclide ) =
3 = 5%;
15 %
• T1/2 is the half-life of the nuclide,
• • uncertainty of the measured dose:
r is the distance between the source and the dosemeter,   2
• G is the dosemeter’s indication measured at the distance r,
u(G) = (0.04)2 + (0.03)2 + 0.04 + 0.01GmSv .
• Hp (3) = G · knuclide is the dose corrected for the dosemeter’s
energy dependence and Here, the single contributions are the uncertainty of the
• knuclide is the correction factor to account for the energy calibration (4 %), the non-linearity of the dose measurement
dependent response of the dosemeter. (3 %) and the coefficient of variation. The latter consists of
a contribution of 0.01 mSv independent of the dose plus a
From the dose rate per activity Ḣp (3)/A at the five distances relative contribution of 4 %. In total, u(G) usually results
r the dose rate constant Γ (Hp (3)) was determined using the in about 6.5 % to 8 % (larger for smaller doses);
mean value of the two dosemeter’s readings on the phantom’s • the contributions of the uncertainty of the half-life and the
eyes via uncertainty of the irradiation time are considered to be neg-
ligible.
  Ḣp (3) 2 G · knuclide · λ · r 2
Γ Hp (3) = ·r = (2)
A A0 · (1 − exp (−λ · τ))
Table 2 shows a typical uncertainty budget, determined
For each nuclide the notation Γ (Hp (3)) is used for the total according to the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in
dose rate constant for both beta and gamma emission. Measurement [16].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Szermerski et al. / Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx 5

Table 2
Typical uncertainty budget for the dose rate constant (example for Tc-99m measured on the left eye at a distance of r = 20 cm).
Quantity Value Standard uncertainty Distribution Sensitivity Uncertainty contribution Index a)
coefficient in mSv·m2 /(h·GBq)

H 8.116 mSv 0.526 mSv normal 2.7·10-3 1.4·10-3 44%

knuclide 0.7100 0.0355 normal 3.1·10-2 1.1·10-3 26%
r 0.20000 m 0.00173 m rectangular 2.2·10-1 3.8·10-4 3.2%
T 6.0067 h 0.0010 h normal -3.7·10-3 -3.7·10-6 0.0%
A0 1.2080 GBq 0.0604 GBq normal -1.8·10-2 -1.1·10-3 26%
␶ 74.9500 h 0.0167 h normal -4.5·10-7 -7.4·10-9 0.0%
Γ (result) 0.0220 mSv·m2 /(h·GBq) 0.0021 mSv·m2 /(h·GBq)
a ) The index shows the influence of the quantity to the total uncertainty: Index = (uncertainty contribution)2 / (uncertainty of the result)2

3 Results depth in tissue. For photons, a simple estimate of the dose rate
constant (neglecting scattering and absorption) is given by
For each of the five nuclides a curve following the
function Ḣp (3)/A = a/r b was fitted through the data   p Ka Hp (3)
Γ Hp (3) = · · (3)
points of the four different distances (Levenberg-Marquardt- 4 · π · r2 Φ Ka
method), see figure 3. The fit was carried out using the
Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm with equally weighted mea- where
sured values. The fits result in b = 2.0 within one to two
standard uncertainties. Except for I-131 b = 1.96 deviates by • p is the photon emission probability,
about four standard uncertainties from 2.0, however, this is • r is the distance for which Γ (Hp (3)) shall be determined
only a deviation of 2 %. Thus, it is assumed that the values (the common distance of 1 m was used),
obtained at different distances follow the inverse square law. • Ka /Φ is the kerma factor, i.e. conversion from photon fluence
Consequently, the dose rate constants Γ (Hp (3)) calculated for to air kerma, taken from ICRU 57 [17], and
different distances were averaged to obtain a unique value of • Hp (3)/ Ka is the conversion coefficient from air kerma to
Γ (Hp (3)) for each nuclide, see table 1, column “this work”. Hp (3), taken from Till et al. [18].
It can be seen from table 1 that the dose rate constant
Γ (Hp (3)) is larger the higher the energy of the emitted particles The resulting values are shown in table 1 in column “from
is. For Tc-99m, I-131 and F-18, only the photons contribute photon emission”. For Tc-99m, I-131 and F-18 they agree
to Γ (Hp (3)) as the particle energy of their beta emission is quite well with the measured dose rate constants within the
below about 700 keV resulting in less than 3 mm penetration given uncertainties, while the value for Ga-68 is about a factor
of three smaller than the measured one. The reason is that the
positron contribution of Ga-68 is not taken into account by
100 equation (3).
Y−90, b=2.03±0.23
Ga−68, b=2.07±0.07
F−18, b=1.96±0.04
Furthermore, the measured values are compared to liter-
I−131, b=1.95±0.01
Tc−99m, b=2.11±0.05 ature values which were recently published for dose rate
constants for the quantity Hp (3), see table 1, column “Otto”
dose rate per activity / mSv/(GBq*h)

[19]. In that column, “u” denotes “unshielded”, i.e. photons

10
(without annihilation photons), electrons and positrons are
taken into account while “s” denotes “shielded”, i.e. photons
and annihilation photons are taken into account. Scattering
and absorption of 1 m of air are also considered [19]. The
1 following can be observed:

• For Tc-99m, I-131 and F-18, the values from Otto for a
shielded source “s” roughly agree with the values mea-
0.1
sured in this work within their uncertainties. This is
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
r / cm
expected, as the sources were encapsulated in syringes or
an applicator resulting in the production of annihilation
Figure 3. Dose rate per activity for the investigated distances. The photons.
data points denote the measurements, the lines are fits of the form • For Ga-68, the measured dose rate constant lies between
f(r) = a/rb for each nuclide. The values of b are given in the legend. the ones from Otto for shielded and unshielded sources.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 B. Szermerski et al. / Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
The reason is that the positrons with their endpoint energy
of 1.9 MeV are significantly but not totally absorbed by the
solution and syringe.
• For Y-90, the measured dose rate constant roughly agrees
with the value from Otto for an unshielded source as the elec-
trons with their endpoint energy of 2.3 MeV significantly
contribute to the measured value of Hp (3).
In conclusion, it can be said that the maximum (of
unshielded and shielded) dose rate constants from Otto [19]
can be used as an upper limit to estimate the actual dose rate
constant of a given nuclide. In case photons and high-energy
beta-emitting nuclides are dominant at the point of interest,
i.e. where the eyes of medical staff may be located, the max-
imum from Otto is a good estimate of the dose rate constant.
However, if the energy of the emitted betas is rather high they
penetrate the cornea and anterior chamber and contribute to
the dose to the lens of the eye, as it is the case for Ga-68. Then,
specific measurements have to be performed to determine the
actual dose rate constant for the prevailing geometry.
Finally, the influence of the different wearing positions
(WP) was assessed by calculating the ratio of the measured
dose at the respective position and the mean value of the two
doses (RWP ) measured at the phantom’s eyes:
 
Γ Hp (3) WP
RWP =       (4)
2 Γ Hp (3) Left eye + Γ Hp (3) Right eye
1
This influence is shown in table 3 and figure 2. In case of
F-18, Tc-99m and I-131 no significant influence on the
measured dose is found as only photons contribute to the
dosemeter’s readings (the photons are strongly penetrating
and, therefore, not significantly affected by the different ori-
entations of the dosemeter). In contrast, an underestimation of
the dose by up to a factor of 2 is possible in case of Ga-68 and
Y-90, when the dosemeter is worn in an unfavorable position,
e.g. on the temples. The reason is the angle dependence of the
dosemeter’s response. The effect is largest for Y-90 as only
betas contribute to the dosemeter’s reading (betas are signifi-
cantly affected by the different orientations of the dosemeter)
and slightly smaller for Ga-68 as annihilation photons (which
Table 3
Dose rate constants divided by the average value of the two dosemeters on the phantom’s eyes.
Position RWP
Tc-99m F-18
Left temple 0.98 ± 0.03 0.99 ± 0.03
Right temple 0.95 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
Left eye 1.01 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
Right eye 0.99 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
Forehead 1.00 ± 0.03 0.97 ± 0.03
Between eyes 0.99 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
are much more penetrating than betas) contribute in addition
to the betas.
4 Discussion
The results obtained show a major difference between the
handling of pure photon or beta emitters with beta endpoint
energies of less than 700 keV, such as Tc-99m, F-18 and
I-131, on the one hand and higher energy beta emitters such
as Ga-68 and Y-90 on the other hand. Electrons and positrons
with energies less than approximately 700 keV are com-
pletely absorbed by the 3 mm thick polyamide layer in front
of the detector, thus the dose rate constant for F-18 mainly
originates from the 511 keV annihilation photons, see also
column “from photon emissions” in table 1. Also, in case
of I-131, the electrons are absorbed by the polyamide layer,
thus the dose rate constant is due to the gamma radiation, see
the same column. In contrast, the considerably higher val-
ues found for Ga-68 and Y-90 are due to the high-energy
positron and electron fractions, respectively, meaning a large
number of beta particles having sufficient energy to pene-
trate the polyamide layer of the dosemeter. The significant
difference of the dose rate constant found for Ga-68 and
Y-90 can be explained by the different mean beta energies
(0.83 MeV and 0.93 MeV, respectively), meaning that in
case of Y-90, significantly more betas are able to penetrate the
polyamide layer. For Ga-68, the dose rate constant is roughly
composed of 0.16 (mSv·m2 )/(GBq·h) from photons (see col-
umn “from photon emissions” in table 1) and consequently
0.34 (mSv·m2 )/(GBq·h) from positrons.
The correction factors knuclide for pure beta-emitting and
pure photon-emitting radionuclides range from 0.6 up to 1.0,
see table 1, resulting in 40 % difference between betas and
photons. This implies that the dosemeters used in this work
are not suitable for measurements in mixed radiation fields
of unknown composition. The large range of knuclide is due
to the 3 mm thick polyamide layer (ρ = 1.13 g/cm3 ) and the
TLD thickness of about 0.9 mm (ρ = 2.64 g/cm3 ), resulting
in an approximately 4.6 mm thick layer of tissue-equivalent
material (ρ = 1.0 g/cm3 ) between the dosemetere’s surface
and the center of the detector. This is considerably larger
than the definition depth of 3 mm in tissue for the quan-
Ga-68 Y-90 I-131
0.67 ± 0.02 0.42 ± 0.01 1.03 ± 0.03
0.70 ± 0.02 0.47 ± 0.01 1.00 ± 0.03
0.97 ± 0.03 0.99 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
1.03 ± 0.03 1.01 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
0.93 ± 0.03 0.92 ± 0.03 0.97 ± 0.03
0.98 ± 0.03 0.96 ± 0.03 1.00 ± 0.03
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
B. Szermerski et al. / Z. Med. Phys. xxx (2015) xxx–xxx
tity Hp (3). Hence, beta radiation is more attenuated in the
dosemeters than it should according to the definition of the
quantity Hp (3) - as beta radiation is significantly absorbed in
a few mm of tissue - while photon radiation is not. There-
fore, the energy correction factors knuclide were determined
and applied.
Furthermore, the findings of this work clearly underline the
necessity for adequate radiation protection measures for the
eye lens when handling high-energy beta emitters. This also
means in particular that protection goggles may be useful in
some cases [20] and local shielding like syringe shields should
be used.
In case of beta emitters with a maximum energy of some
hundred keV, a significant interaction with the tissue takes
place already in the cornea and anterior chamber, so that only
a small amount of energy will be deposited at a tissue depth
of 3 mm or deeper. Therefore, in these cases, considerably
lower exposition of the eye lens is expected. For example,
handling a syringe while applying 250 MBq F-18 without any
further shielding at a distance of 30 cm to the eyes results in
an expected dose rate of 469 ␮Sv/h ± 136 ␮Sv/h. That means,
considering the short time of injection, a dose of some ␮Sv is
expected. It seems unlikely to exceed a limit of 20 mSv per
year when handling such nuclides [21].
The dose rate constants obtained in this work enable the esti-
mation of individual exposures for handling steps in nuclear
medicine. Since the constants were obtained without any radi-
ation protection means (except a normal syringe or vial, see
table 1) the resulting estimates are conservative. It has to be
pointed out that the dose rate constants are suitable only for
dose estimations in nuclear medicine, using the nuclides and
geometries such as syringes as described. Different types of
sources like handling vials or syringes may result in different
dose rate constants due to the different shielding of the source
containment and self-absorption.
Before individual monitoring in terms of Hp (3) can be per-
formed on a regular basis, some issues would have to be
overcome. These include the finding of the correct wearing
position for the dosemeter (taking into account the fact that
some people wear glasses), the uncertainties due to energy and
angle dependence of the dosemeter’s response, the require-
ments on the design (comfortable and decent design due to
contact with patients) and the disciplined use of dosemeters
by staff. Finally, it has to be kept in mind that the dosemeter
has to be worn either behind the protection means and regular
goggles or behind an equivalent layer of material and close
to the eye which is expected to be exposed highest, which is
challenging for the dosemeter’s design.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to Dr. C. Wanke (Medical School
Hannover) for the helpful comments and to Dr. B. Behnke
(PTB) for valuable comments to the manuscript.
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
7
References
[1] ICRP, 1991. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission
on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Ann. ICRP 21 (1-3).
[2] Strahlenschutzverordnung vom 20. Juli 2001 (BGBl. I S. 1714; 2002 I
S. 1459), die zuletzt durch Artikel 5 der Verordnung vom 11. Dezember
2014 (BGBl. I S. 2010) geändert worden ist.
[3] ICRP, 2012. ICRP Statement on Tissue Reactions /Early and Late Effects
of Radiation in Normal Tissues and Organs – Threshold Doses for Tissue
Reactions in a Radiation Protection Context. ICRP Publication 118.
Ann. ICRP 41(1/2).
[4] ICRP Statement on Tissue Reactions Approved by the Commission on
April 21, 2011. ICRP ref 4825-3093-1464.
[5] Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying
down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers aris-
ing from exposure to ionising radiation, and repealing Directives
89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and
2003/122/Euratom.
[6] Carinou E, Ginjaume M, O’Connor U, Kopec R, Sans Merce M. Status
of eye lens radiation dose monitoring in European hospitals. J Radiol
Prot 2014 Dec;34(4):729–39.
[7] Behrens R. Simulation of the dose rate per activity of beta-
emitting radionuclides. Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry 2014, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1093/rpd/ncu353.
[8] Veröffentlichungen der Strahlenschutzkommission. Berechnungs-
grundlage für die Ermittlung von Körperdosen bei äußerer Strahlen-
exposition. Band 43, 2. Auflage, 2007.
[9] http://www.rsdphantoms.com/rt art.htm.
[10] http://www.radcard.pl/det/eye d.html.
[11] Vanhavere F, Carinou E, Gualdrini G, Clairand I, Sans Merce M, Gin-
jaume M, et al. Optimization of Radiation Protection of Medical Staff.
EURADOS Report 2012-02, Braunschweig, April 2012, ISBN 978-3-
943701-01-2.
[12] Böhm J. The National Primary Standard of the PTB for Realizing the
Unit of the Absorbed Dose Rate to Tissue for Beta Radiation. PTB-
Report PTB-Dos-13, ISSN 0172-7095, 1986.
[13] Behrens R, Buchholz G. Extensions to the Beta Secondary Standard
BSS 2. Journal of In-strumentation 2011. JNIST 6, P11007, and Erra-
tum (2012) JINST 7, E04001 and Addendum (2012) JINST 7, A05001:
www.ptb.de/de/org/6/63/f u e/bss2cons.pdf.
[14] Behrens R, Hupe O. Influence of the phantom shape (slab, cylinder, or
Alderson) on the performance of an Hp (3) eye dosemeter. Radiat. Prot.
Dosimetry 2015, http://rpd.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/
07/12/rpd.ncv366.
[15] National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory. Ver-
sion 2.6. http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/.
[16] BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ILAC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, OIML. Guide to the
Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement GUM 1995 with minor
corrections. JCGM 100:2008.
[17] International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Con-
version coefficients for use in Radiological Protection Against External
Radiation. ICRU Report 57 (Bethesda MA: ICRU Publications) (1998).
[18] Till E, Zankl M, Drexler G. Angular Dependence of Depth Doses in a
Tissue Slab Irradiated with Monoenergetic Photons. GSF-Report 27/95,
ISSN 0721-1694 (1995).
[19] Otto T. Personal dose-equivalent conversion coefficients for 1252
radionuclides. Rad. Prot. Dosim. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncu316.
[20] Bruchmann I, Szermerski B, Behrens R, Geworski L. Impact of radiation
protection means on the dose to the lens of the eye while handling
radionuclides in nuclear medicine. Z. Med. Phys 2015, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.zemedi.2015.07.002.
[21] Szermerski B, Bruchmann I, Freudenberg R, Andreeff M, Geworski L.
Exposition der Augenlinse beim Umgang mit radioaktiven Stoffen aus
nuklearmedizinischer Anwendung. Posterbeitrag zur 52. Jahrestagung
der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Nuklearmedizin.