Aniołczyk Halina, Mariańska Magda, Mamrot Paweł
Zakład Ochrony Radiologicznej, Instytut Medycyny Pracy, im. prof. I. Nofera, Łódź.
Med Pr. 2011;62(5):499-515.
Physiotherapists commonly use high-frequency (HF) electromagnetic field (EMF) units for therapeutic heating, whereas they are a source of strong EM fields. High EMF intensity values in places, where physiotherapists perform their occupational duties, require frequent measurements and their exposure must be monitored. Such procedures are obligatory and expensive, but they do not improve working conditions of physiotherapists. The aim of the study was to update the knowledge of actual exposure of physiotherapists to EMF and optimize methodical and decisive procedures.
EMF strength was measured in close proximity of twenty diathermy (SW) units, and in places usually occupied by physiotherapists. Modern digital-readout equipment was used for the measurements. It allowed us to identify the resultant EMF spectrum and to manage the measurement results. Values of the induced current, I(L), in the limbs of 16 physiotherapists were measured.
The highest values of EMF strengths were measured for the whole body of the physiotherapist at the console, to 200 V/m and 0.20 A/m, and at the electrodes, to 180 V/m and 0.40 A/m. During intervention procedures, the physiotherapist's hands were exposed to 900 V/m and 2.0 A/m EMF. The maximum value of the exposure W indicator for routine operations was as high as 0.32, and for intervention procedures as high as 1.67. The maximum intensities of induced currents measured in the physioterapist's upper limbs during intervention procedures were up to 120 mA, depending on individual person.
The results have confirmed the high EMF strength values occurring in the real conditions of the work environment of physiotherapists performing routine procedures. High intensity values of currents induced in the limbs of the physiotherapist performing intervention procedures represent a real threat in 25% of cases. The existing obligatory annual monitoring procedures are expensive and completely fail to offer any protection against EMF. The authors of this paper propose to implement a two-stage (obligatory and facultative) monitoring and measurement system.
物理治疗师通常使用高频（HF）电磁场（EMF）设备进行治疗性加热，而这些设备是强电磁场源。在物理治疗师履行职责的场所，高电磁场强度值需要频繁测量，并且必须监测他们的暴露情况。此类程序是强制性的且成本高昂，但并不能改善物理治疗师的工作条件。本研究的目的是更新关于物理治疗师实际暴露于电磁场的知识，并优化方法和决策程序。
在二十个透热疗法（SW）设备附近以及物理治疗师通常工作的场所测量电磁场强度。使用现代数字读数设备进行测量。这使我们能够识别合成电磁场频谱并管理测量结果。测量了16名物理治疗师四肢中的感应电流I(L)值。
在控制台处测量到物理治疗师全身的最高电磁场强度值为200 V/m和0.20 A/m，在电极处为180 V/m和0.40 A/m。在干预过程中，物理治疗师的手部暴露于900 V/m和2.0 A/m的电磁场中。常规操作的暴露W指标最大值高达0.32，干预过程中高达1.67。干预过程中在物理治疗师上肢测量到的感应电流最大强度高达120 mA，具体取决于个人。
结果证实了在进行常规程序的物理治疗师工作环境实际条件下存在高电磁场强度值。在进行干预程序的物理治疗师四肢中感应的高强度电流值在25%的情况下构成实际威胁。现有的强制性年度监测程序成本高昂，并且完全无法提供任何针对电磁场的防护。本文作者建议实施两阶段（强制性和选择性）监测和测量系统。
