{"title":"Validity of the 1984 Interim Guidelines on Airborne Ultrasound and Gaps in the Current Knowledge.","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Airborne ultrasound is used for various purposes both in industrial and public settings, as well as being produced as a by-product by a range of sources. The International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) published interim guidelines on limiting human exposure to airborne ultrasound in 1984, based on the limited scientific evidence that was available at that time. In order to investigate whether research since 1984 requires the development of revised exposure guidelines we considered (a) within the context of ultrasound exposure the relevance to health of the biological endpoints/mechanisms listed in the IRPA guidelines, (b) the validity of the exposure limits, and (c) whether there are biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered in the guidelines. The analysis of the available evidence showed that the biological endpoints that form the basis of the guidelines are relevant to health and the guidelines provide limits of exposure based on the evidence that was available at the time. However, the IRPA limits and their associated dosimetry were based on limited evidence, which may not be considered as scientifically substantiated. Further, there is no substantiated evidence of biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered by the IRPA guidelines. These two observations could mean that IRPA's limits are too low or too high. Research since the IRPA guidelines has made some improvements in the knowledge base, but there are still significant data gaps that need to be resolved before a formal revision of the guidelines can be made by ICNIRP, including research needs related to health outcomes and improved dosimetry. This statement makes a number of recommendations for future research on airborne ultrasound.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":" ","pages":"326-347"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0000000000001800","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract: Airborne ultrasound is used for various purposes both in industrial and public settings, as well as being produced as a by-product by a range of sources. The International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) published interim guidelines on limiting human exposure to airborne ultrasound in 1984, based on the limited scientific evidence that was available at that time. In order to investigate whether research since 1984 requires the development of revised exposure guidelines we considered (a) within the context of ultrasound exposure the relevance to health of the biological endpoints/mechanisms listed in the IRPA guidelines, (b) the validity of the exposure limits, and (c) whether there are biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered in the guidelines. The analysis of the available evidence showed that the biological endpoints that form the basis of the guidelines are relevant to health and the guidelines provide limits of exposure based on the evidence that was available at the time. However, the IRPA limits and their associated dosimetry were based on limited evidence, which may not be considered as scientifically substantiated. Further, there is no substantiated evidence of biological endpoints/mechanisms not covered by the IRPA guidelines. These two observations could mean that IRPA's limits are too low or too high. Research since the IRPA guidelines has made some improvements in the knowledge base, but there are still significant data gaps that need to be resolved before a formal revision of the guidelines can be made by ICNIRP, including research needs related to health outcomes and improved dosimetry. This statement makes a number of recommendations for future research on airborne ultrasound.
期刊介绍:
Health Physics, first published in 1958, provides the latest research to a wide variety of radiation safety professionals including health physicists, nuclear chemists, medical physicists, and radiation safety officers with interests in nuclear and radiation science. The Journal allows professionals in these and other disciplines in science and engineering to stay on the cutting edge of scientific and technological advances in the field of radiation safety. The Journal publishes original papers, technical notes, articles on advances in practical applications, editorials, and correspondence. Journal articles report on the latest findings in theoretical, practical, and applied disciplines of epidemiology and radiation effects, radiation biology and radiation science, radiation ecology, and related fields.