Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFleishman, A B
dc.contributor.authorNotley, H Maeve
dc.contributor.authorWilkinson, John M
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-09T12:09:28Z
dc.date.available2014-12-09T12:09:28Z
dc.date.issued1983-10
dc.identifier.citationCost benefit analysis of radiological protection: a case study of remote after-loading in gynaecological radiotherapy. 1983, 56 (670):737-44 Br J Radiolen
dc.identifier.issn0007-1285
dc.identifier.pmid6412787
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/336978
dc.description.abstractThe ICRP system of dose limitation requires radiation exposures to be kept "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA). The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) advocates a form of cost benefit analysis for this purpose, in which a comparison is made between the costs of protective measures and the benefits of reduced radiation exposure. In the UK, the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) has been developing a framework for the practical application of cost benefit techniques to aid the evaluation of investments in radiological protection. One such investment, being undertaken at a number of radiotherapy centres, concerns remote after-loading equipment to replace the use of radium in the treatment of gynaecological cancers. The introduction of such equipment can offer a complete solution to the radiological protection problems associated with manual radium insertions but involves large capital expenditures on equipment and shielded treatment rooms. This paper describes a cost benefit analysis of introducing remote after-loading equipment at the Christie Hospital and Holt Radium Institute in Manchester. In accordance with the NRPB framework, it is shown that the introduction of after-loading equipment, when housed in appropriately protected rooms, should result in a substantial net benefit and would therefore be justified on radiological protection grounds according to the ALARA principle.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to The British journal of radiologyen
dc.subject.meshBed Occupancy
dc.subject.meshBrachytherapy
dc.subject.meshCapital Expenditures
dc.subject.meshCost-Benefit Analysis
dc.subject.meshEngland
dc.subject.meshFemale
dc.subject.meshGenital Neoplasms, Female
dc.subject.meshHumans
dc.subject.meshPersonnel, Hospital
dc.subject.meshRadiation Dosage
dc.subject.meshRadiation Protection
dc.subject.meshVisitors to Patients
dc.titleCost benefit analysis of radiological protection: a case study of remote after-loading in gynaecological radiotherapy.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentNational Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, Didcot, Oxonen
dc.identifier.journalBritish Journal of Radiologyen
html.description.abstractThe ICRP system of dose limitation requires radiation exposures to be kept "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA). The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) advocates a form of cost benefit analysis for this purpose, in which a comparison is made between the costs of protective measures and the benefits of reduced radiation exposure. In the UK, the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) has been developing a framework for the practical application of cost benefit techniques to aid the evaluation of investments in radiological protection. One such investment, being undertaken at a number of radiotherapy centres, concerns remote after-loading equipment to replace the use of radium in the treatment of gynaecological cancers. The introduction of such equipment can offer a complete solution to the radiological protection problems associated with manual radium insertions but involves large capital expenditures on equipment and shielded treatment rooms. This paper describes a cost benefit analysis of introducing remote after-loading equipment at the Christie Hospital and Holt Radium Institute in Manchester. In accordance with the NRPB framework, it is shown that the introduction of after-loading equipment, when housed in appropriately protected rooms, should result in a substantial net benefit and would therefore be justified on radiological protection grounds according to the ALARA principle.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record