| A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial comparing two screening devices for radiation contamination. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20836788 Owner: NLM Status: MEDLINE |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
OBJECTIVES: This exploratory study compared the screening ability of a newly introduced radiation detection portal with a traditional Geiger counter for detection of radiation contamination in the setting of a mass casualty training exercise. METHODS: Following a pretrial evaluation of interobserver reliability for Geiger counter use, 30 volunteers were randomly assigned to don gowns containing three disks, each of which was either a sham resembling the radioactive samples or an actual cesium-137 sample; each subject participated a minimum of four times with different gowns each time. Each subject underwent standard radioactivity screening with the Geiger counter and the portal. RESULTS: Interobserver reliability was excellent between the two Geiger counter screeners in the pretrial exercise, correctly identifying 101 of 102 sham and radioactive samples (κ = 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.94 to 1.00). For radioactively labeled subjects across all bodily locations, the portal (43/61, or 70.5%; 95% CI = 58.1% to 80.5%) was less sensitive than the Geiger counter screening (61/61, or 100%; 95% CI = 92.9% to 100%), which resulted in a portal false-negative rate of 29.5%. For radiation detection in the posterior thorax, the portal radiation screening (4/19, or 21.1%; 95% CI = 8% to 43.9%) was less accurate than the Geiger counter (19/19, or 100%; 95% CI 80.2% to 100%). In contrast, there were no major differences between the portal and the Geiger counter for radiation detection at the left shoulder, right shoulder, or sham (nonradiation) detection. There were no false-positive detections of the sham-labeled subjects for either device, yielding a specificity of 100% for both screening modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Geiger counter screening was more sensitive than, and equally specific to, radiation detection portal screening in detecting radioactively labeled subjects during a radiation mass casualty drill. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Philip Salen; Mathew Porter; David Watts; Jill Stoltzfus; Alan Lynch; Christopher Michaelis; Scott Melanson |
Related Documents
:
|
12927418 - Results of the gep-isfg collaborative study on two y-strs tetraplexes: gepy i (dys461, ... 10568298 - The iaea worldwide intercomparison exercises (1990-1997): determination of trace elemen... 16877248 - Clinical implications of bion's thought. 20399108 - Malevolent use of radioactive materials: an international exercise in the analysis of g... 16684848 - Route of administration (enteral or parenteral) affects the contribution of l-glutamine... 12376178 - Cardiovascular responses and neurotransmission in the ventrolateral medulla during skel... |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Volume: 17 ISSN: 1553-2712 ISO Abbreviation: Acad Emerg Med Publication Date: 2010 Sep |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2010-09-14 Completed Date: 2011-02-11 Revised Date: 2011-04-28 |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 9418450 Medline TA: Acad Emerg Med Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 1020-3 Citation Subset: IM |
Copyright Information:
|
2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. |
Affiliation:
|
Department of Emergency Medicine, St. Luke's Hospital, Bethlehem, PA, USA. salenp@slhn.org |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
Cesium Radioisotopes
/
analysis* Double-Blind Method Environmental Monitoring / methods* Humans Observer Variation Radioactive Hazard Release Radiometry / methods* Sensitivity and Specificity |
| Chemical | |
Reg. No./Substance:
|
0/Cesium Radioisotopes |
| Comments/Corrections | |
Comment In:
|
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Jan;18(1):105
[PMID:
21175926
]
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Prospective evaluation of real-time use of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria in an academic e...
Next Document: The learning curve of resident physicians using emergency ultrasonography for obstructive uropathy.