This study aims to assess the adequacy level of radiological protection systems available in the diagnostic radiology facilities located in three capital cities of North East (NE) India. It further attempts to understand, using a multi-disciplinary approach, how the safety codes/standards in diagnostic radiology framed by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to achieve adequate radiological protection in facilities, have been perceived, conceptualized, and applied accordingly in these facilities. About 30 diagnostic radiology facilities were randomly selected from three capitals of states in NE India; namely Imphal (Manipur), Shillong (Meghalaya) and Guwahati (Assam). A semi-structured questionnaire developed based on a multi-disciplinary approach was used for this study. It was observed that radiological practices undertaken in these facilities were not exactly in line with safety codes/standards in diagnostic radiology of the AERB and the IAEA. About 50% of the facilities had registered/licensed x-ray equipment with the AERB. More than 80% of the workers did not use radiation protective devices, although these devices were available in the facilities. About 85% of facilities had no institutional risk management system. About 70% of the facilities did not carry out periodic quality assurance testing of their x-ray equipment or surveys of radiation leakage around the x-ray room, and did not display radiation safety indicators in the x-ray rooms. Workers in these facilities exhibited low risk perception about the risks associated with these practices. The majority of diagnostic radiology facilities in NE India did not comply with the radiological safety codes/standards framed by the AERB and IAEA. The study found inadequate levels of radiological protection systems in the majority of facilities. This study suggests a need to establish firm measures that comply with the radiological safety codes/standards of the AERB and IAEA to protect patients, workers and the public of this region.

No abstract

In the radiotherapy practice, regulator defines risk in terms of physically measurable quantities and attempt to implement the results obtained from the risk assessment of this practice, using quantitative approach. Although such approach has significantly brought down radiation dose, injuries and fatalities to the workers as compared to the radiotherapy practices before World War II, the objectivity concept of risk that limits the assessment regarding physically measurable quantities is widely urged throughout the world. This study examined how the risk associated with radiotherapy practice has been perceived, and experienced by both professional and non-professional workers in the radiotherapy facilities located in Manipur, Meghalaya, and Assam. This study found that professional and nonprofessional workers exhibited different risk perception on the same physical risk. Such different risk perceptions influenced the establishment of radiological protection systems in the facility. Non-professional workers are more likely to be the affected group in a facility having weak radiological protection systems.