Rijken James, Bhat Madhava, Crowe Scott, Trapp Jamie
GenesisCare, St Andrew's Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2019 Sep;42(3):781-787. doi: 10.1007/s13246-019-00782-1. Epub 2019 Jul 25.
Conservatism in the shielding of linear accelerator bunkers is engrained in the methodology of international protocols and guidelines. However, the degree to which this cautious and prudent approach is necessary should be judged against the International Committee of Radiation Protection's principles of exposure justification and optimisation. Radiation survey data from 75 concrete barriers was aggregated and compared to exposure predictions from three popular protocols in order to assess any conservatism in factors used to calculate scatter, leakage and beam penetration. These findings, in addition to a list of common conservative practices, were then used to tally the possible fiscal impact of an over-conservative approach to linear accelerator bunker shielding. While primary beam penetration was accurately predicted, stated conservatisms in scatter and leakage was found to be largely misplaced. An estimated total factor of conservatism calculated from a tally was found to be in agreement with literature values of radiotherapist occupational exposure. This factor amounted to a cost increase of 43% for a single bunker if all conservative assumptions were made. There are aspects of linear accelerator shielding design that have been shown to be overly conservative, beyond what is justifiable by the International Committee of Radiation Protection. Some adjustment to international protocol methodology may be required.
直线加速器掩体屏蔽中的保守主义已深深扎根于国际协议和准则的方法之中。然而,这种谨慎和审慎做法的必要性程度应根据国际辐射防护委员会的照射正当性和优化原则来判断。汇总了来自75个混凝土屏障的辐射测量数据,并将其与三种常用协议的照射预测结果进行比较,以评估用于计算散射、泄漏和束流穿透的因素中是否存在保守性。这些结果,连同一系列常见的保守做法,随后被用于计算直线加速器掩体屏蔽采用过度保守方法可能产生的财政影响。虽然主束流穿透得到了准确预测,但发现散射和泄漏方面规定的保守性在很大程度上是不恰当的。通过计算得出的保守性总系数估计值与放射治疗师职业照射的文献值一致。如果采用所有保守假设,单个掩体的成本将增加43%。直线加速器屏蔽设计的某些方面已被证明过于保守,超出了国际辐射防护委员会认为合理的范围。可能需要对国际协议方法进行一些调整。