No abstract

Occupational therapy practitioners are familiar with most principles of family-centered practice. However, implementation of those principles differs significantly across practice settings.

The occupational external radiation dose to human medical personnel from positron emission tomography (PET) radiopharmaceuticals has been documented, but to date no corresponding veterinary staff dose data are available. Electronic personal dosimeters (EPDs) were used in this study to measure the per-patient external radiation doses to veterinary staff using a PET/CT (PET combined with computed tomography) protocol in which the patient radiopharmaceutical dose was injected after anesthetic induction. Radiation doses were recorded for the nuclear medicine technologists, the on-duty anesthesiology technologist, and an occasional observer from 19 veterinary (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT studies. Patient mass range was 2.8 to 61.0 kg (22.3 kg mean) and injected activity averaged 6 MBq kg(-1) . The dose range received by nuclear medicine technologists per procedure was 0-30 μSv (9.1 μSv mean), by anesthetists 1-22 μSv (8.2 μSv mean), and by the observer 0-2 μSv (0.5 μSv mean). In both feline and canine studies, placement of the EPD on staff was a significant predictor of radiation dose. Additional significant predictors of staff radiation dose from canine studies included job position and injected activity. The per-patient occupational radiation doses to veterinary PET/CT technologists were slightly greater than those reported for human nuclear medicine PET/CT technologists, but were comparable to estimated radiation doses for nurses caring for nonambulatory human PET/CT patients. Efforts toward maintaining staff radiation doses as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) will be important as veterinary PET/CT caseload increases.

Apparent deficiency of soil mineral nutrients often triggers specific physio-morphological changes in plants, and some of these changes could also inadvertently increase the ability of plants to mobilize radionuclides from stable mineral forms. This work, through a series of sand-culture, hydroponics, and batch-equilibration experiments, investigated the differential ability of root exudates of Andropogon virginicus grown under conditions with variable phosphorus (P) availability (KHPO, FePO, Ca(PO), and no P) to solubilize uranium (U) from the uranyl phosphate mineral Chernikovite. The mineral form of P, and hence the bioavailability of P, affected the overall composition of the root exudates. The lower bioavailable forms of P (FePO and Ca(PO)), but not the complete absence of P, resulted in a higher abundance of root metabolites with chelating capacity at 72 hrs after treatment application. In treatments with lower P-bioavailability, the physiological amino acid concentration inside of the roots increased, whereas the concentration of organic acids in the roots decreased due to the active exudation. In batch dissolution experiments, the organic acids, but not amino acids, increase the dissolution U from Chernikovite. The root exudate matrix of plants exposed to low available forms of P induced a >60% increase in U dissolution from Chernikovite due to 5-16 times greater abundance of organic acids in these treatments. However, this was ca. 70% of the theoretical dissolution achievable by this exudate matrix. These results highlight the potential of using active management of soil P as an effective tool to alter the plant-mediated mobilization of U in contaminated soil.

Despite a longstanding recognition that radiological protection is not only a matter of science, but also ethics, ICRP publications have rarely addressed the ethical foundations of the system of radiological protection explicitly. The purpose of this publication is to describe how the Commission has relied on ethical values, either intentionally or indirectly, in developing the system of radiological protection with the objective of presenting a coherent view of how ethics is part of this system. In so doing, it helps to clarify the inherent value judgements made in achieving the aim of the radiological protection system as underlined by the Commission in Publication 103. Although primarily addressed to the radiological protection community, this publication is also intended to address authorities, operators, workers, medical professionals, patients, the public, and its representatives (e.g. NGOs) acting in the interest of the protection of people and the environment. This publication provides the key steps concerning the scientific, ethical, and practical evolutions of the system of radiological protection since the first ICRP publication in 1928. It then describes the four core ethical values underpinning the present system: beneficence/ non-maleficence, prudence, justice, and dignity. It also discusses how these core ethical values relate to the principles of radiological protection, namely justification, optimisation, and limitation. The publication finally addresses key procedural values that are required for the practical implementation of the system, focusing on accountability, transparency, and inclusiveness. The Commission sees this publication as a founding document to be elaborated further in different situations and circumstances.