EANM perspective

M N Lonsdale; M Lassmann

doi:10.1093/rpd/ncs293

EANM perspective

Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

Two scientific committees (physics & dosimetry) of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) commented on the draft 'Radiation Protection 162: radiation criteria for acceptability of radiological equipment used in diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy' (RP 162). This document updates and extends the acceptability criteria mentioned in 'Radiation Protection 91' and is an important means to further improve the quality of medical procedures involving ionising radiation. While the EANM committees support the presented framework as described in the introductory chapter, they have suggested substantial changes to the specific suspension levels for nuclear medicine equipment. During the revision process, an agreed consensus position was reached. The EANM considers RP 162 a significant improvement of RP 91 and endorses the document.

Original language	English
Journal	Radiation Protection Dosimetry
Volume	153
Issue number	2
Pages (from-to)	166-9
Number of pages	4
ISSN	0144-8420
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncs293
Publication status	Published - 2013

Access to Document

10.1093/rpd/ncs293

Cite this

@article{c18fe576dafa47038462e69183cc7f99,

title = "EANM perspective",

abstract = "Two scientific committees (physics & dosimetry) of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) commented on the draft 'Radiation Protection 162: radiation criteria for acceptability of radiological equipment used in diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy' (RP 162). This document updates and extends the acceptability criteria mentioned in 'Radiation Protection 91' and is an important means to further improve the quality of medical procedures involving ionising radiation. While the EANM committees support the presented framework as described in the introductory chapter, they have suggested substantial changes to the specific suspension levels for nuclear medicine equipment. During the revision process, an agreed consensus position was reached. The EANM considers RP 162 a significant improvement of RP 91 and endorses the document.",

author = "Lonsdale, {M N} and M Lassmann",

year = "2013",

doi = "10.1093/rpd/ncs293",

language = "English",

volume = "153",

pages = "166--9",

journal = "Radiation Protection Dosimetry",

issn = "0144-8420",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - EANM perspective

AU - Lonsdale, M N

AU - Lassmann, M

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Two scientific committees (physics & dosimetry) of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) commented on the draft 'Radiation Protection 162: radiation criteria for acceptability of radiological equipment used in diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy' (RP 162). This document updates and extends the acceptability criteria mentioned in 'Radiation Protection 91' and is an important means to further improve the quality of medical procedures involving ionising radiation. While the EANM committees support the presented framework as described in the introductory chapter, they have suggested substantial changes to the specific suspension levels for nuclear medicine equipment. During the revision process, an agreed consensus position was reached. The EANM considers RP 162 a significant improvement of RP 91 and endorses the document.

AB - Two scientific committees (physics & dosimetry) of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) commented on the draft 'Radiation Protection 162: radiation criteria for acceptability of radiological equipment used in diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy' (RP 162). This document updates and extends the acceptability criteria mentioned in 'Radiation Protection 91' and is an important means to further improve the quality of medical procedures involving ionising radiation. While the EANM committees support the presented framework as described in the introductory chapter, they have suggested substantial changes to the specific suspension levels for nuclear medicine equipment. During the revision process, an agreed consensus position was reached. The EANM considers RP 162 a significant improvement of RP 91 and endorses the document.

U2 - 10.1093/rpd/ncs293

DO - 10.1093/rpd/ncs293

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 23173215

SN - 0144-8420

VL - 153

SP - 166

EP - 169

JO - Radiation Protection Dosimetry

JF - Radiation Protection Dosimetry

IS - 2

ER -

EANM perspective

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this