official WeChat

ZHOU Yuanyuan, WANG Jin, CHEN Wei, MIAO Yuji. Analysis of a provincial CDC's results in the comparison of national biological dose estimation capability from 2017 to 2022[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2024, 42(5): 620-623. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2024.05.011
Citation: ZHOU Yuanyuan, WANG Jin, CHEN Wei, MIAO Yuji. Analysis of a provincial CDC's results in the comparison of national biological dose estimation capability from 2017 to 2022[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2024, 42(5): 620-623. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2024.05.011

Analysis of a provincial CDC's results in the comparison of national biological dose estimation capability from 2017 to 2022

  • Objective To improve the biological dose estimation capability in responding to nuclear and radiation emergencies by analyzing the results and deviation causes from a provincial CDC's laboratory participating in the national biological dose estimation capability assessment.
    Methods The data of a provincial center for disease control and prevention's radiological biology laboratory participating in the national biological dose estimation capability assessment from 2017 to 2022 were retrospectively collected. The number of cells analyzed for chromosomal aberrations, the rate of dicentric (dic) and ring (r) chromosome aberrations, and the rate of dic+r aberrations in peripheral blood lymphocytes of each sample were sorted out. The relative deviation between the estimated value and the irradiation dose of the assessed samples was analyzed. From 2017 to 2021, the dose was estimated using the dose-response curve in GB/T 28236-2011. In 2022, the dose was estimated using the dose-response curve established by the provincial CDC itself.
    Results All 12 biological dose assessment samples from 2017 to 2022 were 100% qualified, with relative deviations all ≤ 20%, among which 4 samples had relative deviations ≤ 5%, accounting for 33.3%. The estimated doses of 8 samples were lower than the actual irradiation dose, accounting for 66.7%. The average dose estimated by the dose-response curve of the laboratory was (2.16 ± 1.26) Gy, while the average dose estimated by the dose-response curve recommended in GB/T 28236-2011 was (2.15 ± 1.26) Gy, and there was no statistically significant difference between these two standard curves (P > 0.05).
    Conclusions The quality of chromosome specimen preparation and the experience of technical personnel are two important factors affecting the quality of biological dose estimation. Improving the quality of chromosome specimen preparation and strengthening the ability of laboratory technicians to identify chromosomal aberration indicators can improve the accuracy of biological dose estimation for personnel in nuclear and radiation emergencies.
  • loading

Catalog

    Turn off MathJax
    Article Contents

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return