[en] Short communication

No abstract available

[en] Latest developments in personal dosimetry are reviewed

No abstract available

[en] Since the response of thermoluminescent dosimeters are highly affected by systemdependent parameters, any variation in the reader conditions, in the thermal treatment or in the readout parameters may cause significant changes of the relative sensitivity of the system. For this reason the essential parameters determining satisfactory operation of the dosimetry system must be regularly monitored. For most commercially available systems a certain number of controls, like the control of the preheating and heating temperatures or the control of the power supply voltage of the photomultiplier, are carried out automatically. In the daily routine work of a personnel monitoring laboratory these controls have to be complemented by specific measurements which check the general behaviour of the measurement circuit and which make part of the dose evaluation procedure. The analysis of these measurements over a long period permit an estimation of the practical long-term stability of the sensitivity of an automatic radiothermoluminescent dosimetry system. The authors report on the experience gained in the field with the use of a standard Harshaw system of a Swiss personnel monitoring laboratory. 1 ref., 2 figs. (Author)

[en] A general description is given of the dosimetric concepts in todays Individula Monitoring on which the TNO thermoluminiscence dosimetry (TLD) system is based. Some technical details of the TLD system itself are given. (H.W.). 10 refs.; 6 figs.; 1 tab

No abstract available

No abstract available

[en] A type thermoluminiscence dosemeter is presented which is phycically thick enough for ease of handling and length of useful life, while it behaves to radiation as if it where thin. (H.W.). 4 refs.; 3 figs.; 1 tab

[en] Almost half a century of continuous services to patients across the globe through outstanding scientific standards deserves a celebration. During my twenty five years of clinical radiology practice, my activities were supported by two priorities: First, to do a thorough evaluation of any request for radiological tests submitted to me by the attending doctor. Once the test was clearly justified by the patient's clinical conditions, I tried to obtain the best and optimal image quality to allow me to make an accurate diagnosis of the patient's disease, while keeping in mind that the least dose of radiation is delivered to the patient and health care providers that are present during the radiological examination; second, to stress the central role of the medical radiation physicist in establishing a quality assurance programme to ensure safe and effective use of X rays in diagnostic radiology