DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The comparison of angular dependence for optical stimulated luminescence dosimeter(OSLD) and electronic personal dosimeter(EPD) used in Diagnostic Radiology

영상의학과에서 사용되는 광자극 형광선량계와 전자식 개인선량계의 방향 의존성 비교

  • Received : 2015.05.31
  • Accepted : 2015.06.30
  • Published : 2015.06.30

Abstract

The angular dependence of active dosimeters, EPD, is analysed and compared with that of passive dosimeters, OSLD, after evaluating their relative response and uncertainty of measurement, where it is known that the personal use of them has been increased recently. There appeared a minor variation for average relative response of OSLD in the horizontal and vertical directions within the range $0^{\circ}{\sim}{\pm}90^{\circ}$, which are 0.97 and 0.95 respectively. The variations of angular dependence in the same situations with OSLD are 0.65 and 0.62, respectively, which also reveals a negligible effect on the overall uncertainty. EPDs within the interval $0^{\circ}{\sim}{\pm}60^{\circ}$ for horizontal and vertical directions are 0.94 and 0.97, respectively. These satisfy the requirements of IEC 61526. Uncertainties about the dependence of direction from horizontal and vertical directions are 0.44, 0.40, respectively. The impact of these uncertainties on the overall uncertainty was negligible. However, we observed a significant change in reactivity: the relative reactivities for $+90^{\circ}$ and $-90^{\circ}$ from the horizontal direction are 0.60, 0.37, while that form vertical direction is 0.06. The direction dependence of OSLD was superior to EPD in the range of $0^{\circ}{\sim}{\pm}90^{\circ}$. There appeared a rapidly changing structural features in EPD response for a certain direction. Therefore, we conclude that concurrent use of passive dosimeters and auxiliary dosimeter provides accurate data for personal dose measurements.

최근 개인선량계로 사용이 증가하고 있는 수동형 선량계인 OSLD와 능동형 선량계인 EPD의 상대 반응도(relative response), 측정 불확도(uncertainty of measurement)를 계산하여 방향의존성(angular dependence)을 비교, 분석하였다. OSLD는 수평, 수직방향의 $0^{\circ}{\sim}{\pm}90^{\circ}$ 범위에서 평균 상대 반응도는 0.97, 0.95의 작은 변화를 보였고 방향의존성에 대한 불확도는 0.65, 0.62로 전체 불확도에 미치는 영향은 미미한 것으로 판단되었다. EPD는 $0^{\circ}{\sim}{\pm}60^{\circ}$ 범위에서 수평, 수직방향 평균 상대 반응도는 0.94, 0.97로 확인되어 IEC 61526 규정을 만족하였다. 방향의존성에 대한 불확도는 수평, 수직방향에서 0.44, 0.40로 전체 불확도에 미치는 영향은 미미하였다. 그러나 수평방향에서 $+90^{\circ}$, $-90^{\circ}$ 방향의 상대 반응도는 0.60, 0.37이고 수직방향에서 $+90^{\circ}$ 방향의 반응도는 0.06으로 반응도의 큰 변화를 관찰할 수 있었다. OSLD의 방향 의존성은 $0^{\circ}{\sim}{\pm}90^{\circ}$ 범위까지 EPD에 비해 우수하였으며 EPD의 경우 구조적 특징으로 반응도가 급변하는 특정방향이 존재하였다. 따라서 수동형선량계와 보조선량계의 병행사용이 개인피폭선량측정의 정확도를 기할 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. W.H. Lee, S.C Kim, and S.M Ahn. "Comparison on the Dosimetry of TLD and OSLD Used in Nuclear Medicine." The Journal of the Korea Contents Association Vol12. No2. pp329-334. 2012
  2. Essers M, and BJ Milnheer. "In vivo dosimetry during external photon beam radiotheraphy", International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, Vol43. No2. pp245-255. 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00341-1
  3. J.H.Choi, G.J. Kang, and S.G. Chang. "Comparison on the dosimetry of TLD and PLD by dose area product." The Journal of the Korea Contents Association Vol12. No3. pp244-250. 2012 https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2012.12.03.244
  4. Jursinic PA. Characterization of optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters, OSLDs, for clinical dosimetric measurements. Med Phys. 2007;34(12):4594-4604 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2804555
  5. K. S. Chae, Y. K. Kim, S. I. Ho, K. S. Nho. "A Study on Thermoluminescent Dosimeter" kyungnam university. materials research Vol5. pp143-151. 1995
  6. I. Mrcela, T. Bokulic, and J. Izewska,"Optically stimulated luminescence in vivo dosimetry for radio therapy: physical characterization and clinical measurements in 60Co beams," Physics in Medicine and Biology, Vol.56. No.18. 2011.
  7. M Luzik-Bhadra and S Perle. "Electronic personal dosemeters will replace passive dosemeters in the near future". Radiat Prot Dosimetry. Vol123. No4. pp546-553. 2007 https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncl145
  8. Bolognese-Milsztajn T, Ginjaume M, Luszik-Bhadra M, Vanhavere F, Wahl W and Weeks A. "Active personal dosimeters for individual monitoring and other New Developments". Radiat Prot Dosimetry. Vol12. No1. pp141-168. 2012
  9. Zodiates T. "Operational experience with a legal electronic dosimetry system". 4th European ISOE, Lyon (France), 2004
  10. JP McCaffrey, H Shen and B Downton. "Dose rate dependency of electronic personal dosemeters measuring X- and $\gamma$-ray radiation. Radiat. Prot. Dosim". Radiat Prot Dosimetry. Vol131. No2. pp229-235. 2008 https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncn133
  11. Y. H. KANG,; S.M. KWON, B.S. KIM, "Relative ratio about dose value of thermoluminescence and optical stimulated luminescence dosimeter according to exposed condition in diagnostic radiation". Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology, Vol6. No6. pp 499-505. 2012 https://doi.org/10.7742/jksr.2012.6.6.499
  12. J.S. Seo etc. "Electronic personal dosimeter for gamma-ray measurement angular-dependent experiments", The korean association for radiation protection, pp 186-187. 2009
  13. korean standards association, "IEC 61267 Medical diagnostic X-ray equipment-Radiation conditions for use in the determination of characteristics".
  14. Perks, Christopher A., Cliff Yahnke, and Marc Million. "Medical dosimetry using Optically Stimulated Luminescence dots and microStar readers." 2008..
  15. http://www.thermoscientific.com/en/product/epdelectronic-personal-dosimeters.html
  16. IEC 61526 "Radiation protection instrumentation - direct reading personal dose equivalent meters and monitors".
  17. Nuclear safety and swcurity commission http://www.nssc.go.kr/nssc/information/law2.jsp?mode=view&article_no=3012&pager.offset=100&board_no=9
  18. M. S. Akselrod, Btter-Jensen L, and S.W. McKeever "Optically stimulated luminescence and its use in medical dosimetry", Radiat Measurements. Vol. 41, pp.78-99, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2005.04.005
  19. "Radiation detection & measurement", 2012, ISBN-13 978-89-5616-498-4, Chungu publishing co.
  20. J. R. Kerns, S. F.Kry, Sahoo, N. Followill, D. S., &Ibbott, G. S. "Angular dependence of the nanoDot OSL dosimeter". Medical physics, Vol38. No7. pp3955-3962. 2011 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3596533
  21. IAEA. Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy. "An International Code of Practice for Dosimetry Based on Standards of Absorbed Dose to Water", Technical Reports Series No. 398, Vienna International Atomic Energy Agency, 2000
  22. J. K. PARK, E.H. CHO "Measurement of the Spatial Dose Rate for Distribution Room in Department of Nuclear Medicine", Journal of Digital Contents Society Vol. 13 No. 2 pp. 151-157 2012 https://doi.org/10.9728/dcs.2012.13.2.151