لخّصلي

Medical personnel is usually exposed to ionizing radiation while performing diagnostic, interventional, or therapeutic procedures in planned conditions, which can elevate the risks and potentials of carcinogenesis.Strict regulations and recommendations were founded and adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) on the conservative premise that no amount of exposure can be considered safe for granted (Osman et al., 2022; Sulieman et al., 2022; Alkhorayef et al., 2020; ICRP, 2007).Specific dose limits were established to reduce the probability of radiation-induced cancer effects and prevent tissue reaction occurrence (Johary et al., 2022; Harrison et al., 2021; Sulieman et al., 2018; ICRP, 2007).Tissue reaction effects usually originate from somatic cell death or deformity after radiation exposure and only manifest if the radiation dosage surpasses a certain threshold.Cancer or hereditary factors that contribute to cancer development are known as cancer effects, and they can affect either adult somatic cells or germ cells through mutation.

Medical personnel is usually exposed to ionizing radiation while performing diagnostic, interventional, or therapeutic procedures in planned conditions, which can elevate the risks and potentials of carcinogenesis. Strict regulations and recommendations were founded and adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) on the conservative premise that no amount of exposure can be considered safe for granted (Osman et al., 2022; Sulieman et al., 2022; Alkhorayef et al., 2020; ICRP, 2007). Specific dose limits were established to reduce the probability of radiation-induced cancer effects and prevent tissue reaction occurrence (Johary et al., 2022; Harrison et al., 2021; Sulieman et al., 2018; ICRP, 2007). Tissue reaction effects usually originate from somatic cell death or deformity after radiation exposure and only manifest if the radiation dosage surpasses a certain threshold. Cancer or hereditary factors that contribute to cancer development are known as cancer effects, and they can affect either adult somatic cells or germ cells through mutation.
Furthermore, the ICRP supports the broader responsibility of having all exposure levels “as low as reasonably practicable” and keeping exposures below dosage limits based on that supposition (ALARA). The limits of exposure to ionizing radiation are classified according to whether the exposed individual works in the field or is a patient or a public member. For occupational exposure, the ICRP established an annual average limit dose of 20 mSv, (averaged over any five years) with a maximum allowed annual limit of 50 mSv in any single year (ICRP, 2007). Occupational exposure and the consequent limits may vary slightly with the different procedures such as conventional radiology or nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, and positron emission tomography (PET) imaging (Alnaaimi et al., 2017; Alkhorayef et al., 2020; Clement, 2011; Rehani et al., 2011). Careful supervision of locations where irradiation or radioactive substances are managed is a necessary guarantee that yearly workplace radiation levels do not surpass this level. The likelihood of cancer and genetic effects is extremely low for yearly radiation exposure below approximately 100 mSv. The linear non-threshold (LNT) model, which is based on the presumption that cancer and hereditary effects occur in proportion to increment in radiation doses surpassing background radiation levels, is thought to be both practical and advisable from the safety precaution principle's point of view for managing radiological protection at low exposure and low exposure rates (Alkhorayef et al., 2018; Jaafar et al., 2021).
Nuclear medicine imaging, which exposes patients and medical staff to high doses of ionizing radiation, is more commonly used these days. This, in turn, raised numerous radiation safety concerns. In addition to diagnosing malignancies, PET, for example, has become a popular diagnostic tool for assessing vascular disorders (Bernier et al., 2018). Technologists working in such premises are thus exposed to higher levels of radiation exposure (Antic et al., 2014; Vañó et al., 1998). This increases the risk of reversible and irreversible genotoxicity (Azizova et al., 2018) and other biological effects that worsen with workload and time (Al-Abdulsalam and Brindhaban, 2014).
Exposure to ionizing radiation at low doses for many years increases the risk of long-term effects that may be apparent several years later. Medical personnel working in nuclear medicine departments had an increased risk of cancer induction, chromosomal abnormalities, and cytogenetic damage (Almujally et al., 2022; Adliene et al., 2020). Hence assessment of exposures and radiation risks to workers and developing protective measures is of high priority. Occupational dose assessment in radiology is well documented (Khouqeer, 2022; Sulieman et al., 2021; Alnaaimi et al., 2017; Bernier et al., 2018; Söylemez et al., 2012; Sulieman et al., 2008; Zeyrek and Gündüz, 2005; Gunduz et al., 2004; Vañó et al., 1998), but little is published in nuclear medicine, with significantly considerable variation in the annual occupational doses in terms of Hp(10), Hp(0.7) and (Hp3) (Ali et al., 2021; Bayram et al., 2011). This is the first study to report occupational exposure in hybrid imaging in the eastern region of Saudi Arabia. This was a significant point of attraction to us to conduct this study to assess the occupational radiation dose for nuclear medicine workers and determine whether there were any differences in radiation dose levels received by the different categories of staff: technologists, nurses, medical physicists and medical doctors or physicians and determine the associated risks