Design and Development Prototype of Indigenous Robotic Radio Pharmaceutical Dispenser
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51983/arme-2020.9.2.2480Keywords:
nuclear medicine, dispensing, radioactive exposure, radioactive contamination, automation, syringeAbstract
Working in the nuclear medicine department leads to a possibility of long term low level radiations exposure. Imaging technologies like positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon computer tomography (SPECT) requires radiopharmaceuticals to be administered into the patients. There is radiation exposure to the staff especially when they dispense the required radioactive medicine doses with their hands into the syringes from the source vial. Also, during the process there is a possibility of spillage of the radioactive pharmaceuticals which could lead to radioactive contamination. This project aims at automating the steps involved in dispensing the unit doses into the respective syringes from the source vial and placing it in a lead shielded container. This will be achieved by developing a robotic application to carry out the activities. This will reduce the time for which the nuclear medicine staffs is exposed to the radioactive syringe. The only time when he will be exposed will be when it is injected into the patients.
References
T. Donmoon, W. Chamroonrat, and M. Tuntawiroon, “Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine staffs during 18F-FDG PET/CT procedures at Ramathibodi hospital,” In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 694, No. 1, pp. 012061,Mar 2016.
H. Piwowarska-Bilska, B. Birkenfeld, A. Gwardyś, A. Supińska, M. H. Listewnik, B. Elbl, and K. Cichoń-Bańkowska, “Occupational exposure at the Department of Nuclear Medicine as a work environment: A 19-year follow-up,” Polish journal of radiology, Vol.76, No.2, pp.18-21, Apr2011.
A. Jha, A. Singh, S. Mithun, S. Shah, A. Agrawal, N. Purandare, B. Shetye, and V. Rangarajan, “Designing of high-volume PET/CT facility with optimal reduction of radiation exposure to the staff: Implementation and optimization in a tertiary health care facility in India,” World journal of nuclear medicine, Vol.14, No.3, pp. 189-196, Sep 2015.
Alenezi and K. Soliman, “Trends in radiation protection of positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging,” Annals of the ICRP, Vol. 44, No. 1_suppl, pp. 259-270, 2015.
S. Robert and V. Gerbaudo, “Occupational radiation dosimetry assessment using an automated infusion device for positron-emitting radiotracers,” Journal of nuclear medicine technology, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 244-248, 2015.
P.Covens, D. Berus, F. Vanhavere, and V. Caveliers. “The introduction of automated dispensing and injection during PET procedures: a step in the optimisation of extremity doses and whole-body doses of nuclear medicine staff.” Radiation protection dosimetry, Vol. 140, No. 3, pp. 250-258, 2010.
N. Benatar, B. Cronin, and M. O’doherty. “Radiation dose rates from patients undergoing positron emission tomography: implications for technologists and waiting areas,” European journal of nuclear medicine, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 583-589, Apr 2000.
T. Biran, J. Weininger, S. Malchi, R. Marciano, and R. Chisin. “Measurements of occupational exposure for a technologist performing 18F FDG PET scans,” Health physics, Vol.87, No. 5, pp. 539-544, Nov 2004.
Chiesa, V. De Sanctis, F. Crippa, M. Schiavini, C. Fraigola, A. Bogni, C. Pascali, D. Decise, R. Marchesini, and E. Bombardieri. “Radiation dose to technicians per nuclear medicine procedure: comparison between technetium-99m, gallium-67, and iodine-131 radiotracers and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose.” European journal of nuclear medicine, Vol. 24, No. 11, pp. 1380-1389,Nov 1997.
B.Guillet, P. Quentin, S. Waultier, M. Bourrelly, P. Pisano, and O. Mundler, “Technologist radiation exposure in routine clinical practice with 18F-FDG PET,” Journal of nuclear medicine technology, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 175-179, Sep 2005.
O. Roberts, O.Fiona , H. Gunawardana, K. Pathmaraj, A. Wallace, T. Mi, S. Berlangieri, G. O’Keefe, C. Rowe, and A. Scott, “Radiation dose to PET technologists and strategies to lower occupational exposure.” Journal of nuclear medicine technology, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 44-47, Mar 2005.
Robinson, J. Young, A. Wallace, and V. Ibbetson, “A study of the personal radiation dose received by nuclear medicine technologists working in a dedicated PET center,” Health physics , Vol. 88, No. 2 Suppl, pp. S17-21,Feb 2005.
T. Seierstad, E. Stranden, K. Bjering, M. Evensen, A. Holt, H. M. Michalsen, and O. Wetteland, “Doses to nuclear technicians in a dedicated PET/CT centre utilising 18F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG),” Radiation protection dosimetry , Vol.123, No. 2, pp. 246-249,Feb 2007.
P. Tandon, M. Venkatesh, and B. Bhatt, “Extremity dosimetry for radiation workers handling unsealed radionuclides in nuclear medicine departments in India,” Health physics, Vol.92, No. 2, pp. 112-118, Feb 2007.
B. Zeff, and M.Yester, “Patient self‐attenuation and technologist dose in positron emission tomography,” Medical physics, Vol.32, No. 4, pp. 861-865, Apr 2005.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 The Research Publication
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
