Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “physicists”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2014

TH-A-16A-01: Image Quality for the Radiation Oncology Physicist: Review of the Fundamentals and Implementation

The expansion and integration of diagnostic imaging technologies such as On Board Imaging (OBI) and Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) into radiation oncology has required radiation oncology physicists to be responsible for and become familiar with assessing image quality. Unfortunately many radiation oncology physicists have had little or no training or experience in measuring and assessing image quality. Many physicists have turned to automated QA analysis software without having a fundamental understanding of image quality measures. This session will review the basic image quality measures of imaging technologies used in the radiation oncology clinic, such as low contrast resolution, high contrast resolution, uniformity, noise, and contrast scale, and how to measure and assess them in a meaningful way. Additionally a discussion of the implementation of an image quality assurance program in compliance with Task Group recommendations will be presented along with the advantages and disadvantages of automated analysis methods. Learning Objectives: Review and understanding of the fundamentals of image quality. Review and understanding of the basic image quality measures of imaging modalities used in the radiation oncology clinic. Understand how to implement an image quality assurance program and to assess basic image quality measures in a meaningful way.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-207-00: CT Lung Cancer Screening and the Medical Physicist: Moving Forward

In the United States, Lung Cancer is responsible for more cancer deaths than the next four cancers combined. In addition, the 5 year survival rate for lung cancer patients has not improved over the past 40 to 50 years. To combat this deadly disease, in 2002 the National Cancer Institute launched a very large Randomized Control Trial called the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). This trial would randomize subjects who had substantial risk of lung cancer (due to age and smoking history) into either a Chest X-ray arm or a low dose CT arm. In November 2010, the National Cancer Institute announced that the NLST had demonstrated 20% fewer lung cancer deaths among those who were screened with low-dose CT than with chest X-ray. In December 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended the use of Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT and a little over a year later (Feb. 2015), CMS announced that Medicare would also cover Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT. Thus private and public insurers are required to provide Lung Cancer Screening programs using CT to the appropriate population(s). The purpose of this Symposium is to inform medical physicists and prepare them to support the implementation of Lung Screening programs. This Symposium will focus on the clinical aspects of lung cancer screening, requirements of a screening registry for systematically capturing and tracking screening patients and results (such as required Medicare data elements) as well as the role of the medical physicist in screening programs, including the development of low dose CT screening protocols. Learning Objectives: To understand the clinical basis and clinical components of a lung cancer screening program, including eligibility criteria and other requirements. To understand the data collection requirements, workflow, and informatics infrastructure needed to support the tracking and reporting components of a screening program. To understand the role of the medical physicist in implementing Lung Cancer Screening protocols for CT, including utilizing resources such as the AAPM Protocols and the ACR Designated Lung Screening Center program. UCLA Department of Radiology has an Institutional research agreement with Siemens Healthcare; Dr. McNitt-Gray has been a recipient of Research Support from Siemens Healthcare in the past. Dr. Aberle has been a Member of Advisory Boards for the LUNGevity Foundation (2011-present) and Siemens Medical Solutions. (2013)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-B-BRA-00: The Medical Physicist Value Proposition for Tomorrow and Today

In the current rapidly changing Healthcare environment, many groups are competing for limited resources. How can medical physicists position themselves to be a relevant stakeholder in the discussion of how those resources are allocated Our value goes beyond what can be shown in a business plan and is heavily involved with safety and quality. Three areas will be explored: What is our value? Who needs to receive that message? How do we communicate that message? To help frame the discussion in terms of how other stakeholders may view the value of medical physicists, a physician and an administrator will present their perspective. Lastly, a multidisciplinary panel will present real life examples of strategies that can be utilized today to establish the value of medical physicists. The presentation of these examples will lead into an interactive question and answer time. V. Willcut, I work for Elekta. There was no research associated with this talk.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-P-33: Combining Research and Professional Practice in the Clinical Setting: A Medical Physicist Personal Experience

Purpose: To initiate a discussion on the current and evolving role of Medical Physicists based on author’s professional and research experience in patient safety and quality control. Methods: Several professionals of the departments of Medical Physics and Radiation Oncology, chiefly devoted to clinical tasks, began a research program on patient safety and quality control in a framework provided by the implementation of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). We performed studies on virtual simulation for IORT, in vivo dosimetry, failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA), statistical process control (SPC), and receiver operating characteristics of dosimetric equipment. This was done with the support of our research foundation and different grants while continuing with our departmental clinical routine involving about 1600 annual treatments with two linacs and different brachytherapy techniques. Results: We published 5 papers in international journals in the last two years. This author conducted a doctoral research which resulted in a dissertation in 2015. The extra time spent after treatments was essential to succeed. Funding and support achieved via our foundation played a crucial role; but this would have not been possible without punctual external mentoring and partnership. FMEA conclusions were able to be implemented only with staff commitment; however, conclusions concerning equipment cannot be easily communicated to manufacturers. These tasks required extra training in the appropriated methods. Conclusion: Research needed the support of a dedicated foundation, which would have been very difficult to obtain with the sole participation of our departments. FMEA and SPC results may need engagement of staff and manufacturers, respectively, hard to achieve without strong recommendations or even a regulatory framework. All these fields need evolution of Medical Physicists’ roles and additional training. Devotion to both clinical tasks and research could be unfeasible for Medical Physicists in the clinical setting without the appropriate rearrangement of their schedules and tasks. Supported by grants IPT-300000-2010-3 and PI11/01659. ERDF funds and Spanish Government.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

WE-G-204-00: Post-Graduate Training of the Next Generation of Academic Medical Physicists

While many indicators for academic medical physics are distressing – jobs are tight, demands on clinical time are high (and getting worse) and national funding has been flat for several years (meaning less money in reality) the present is perhaps one of the most exciting times in cancer research history, and medical physicists have an opportunity to make a difference. Many of us predict the impact of medical physics on cancer research over the next decade to be more significant than ever. Why is that? First, medical imaging is used for every cancer patient in developed countries. Every improvement in the acquisition, processing or analysis of radiological images has the potential to impact patients. The use of radiation therapy is at an all-time high – and virtually cannot be performed without medical physics. Many of the advances in both biomedical imaging and radiation oncology are the result of the hard work of academic medical physicists who are thinking of the next generation of technologies that will be used against cancer or an even broader spectrum of diseases. A career in academic medical physics is demanding, particularly for those with clinical responsibilities. As the demands for justification of their clinical effort become increasingly metricized, the ability to do “unfunded research” will become even more difficult. This means that many will have to generate external salary support to justify their efforts in research and development. This comes at a time when funding for research is compressed and harder to obtain. Generally speaking, if you are not contributing 50% or more of your effort to research, you are competing at a disadvantage and it is very unlikely you will get an NIH/NCI/NIBIB grant. Furthermore, in the ongoing effort to improve patient care and safety, we have developed credentialing pathways that now require at least two-years of residency training. This full-time clinical training creates a gap in the research trajectory of graduate students who aspire to academic positions with an expectation for extramural funding. To address this, several residency programs have created hybrid programs where the two-years of clinical training is combined with one or two years of research effort to allow candidates to further establish an academic identity and to ensure adequate academic productivity to compete for a beginning faculty position. In conclusion, while the path to a successful career in academic medical physics is steep and sometimes hard to follow, reaching the apex is worth the journey. Different paths to a career in medical physics are available, you just have to decide which one is right for you. If improving cancer care is your goal as a physicist, then academic medical physics is the job for you!.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

MO-D-213-06: Quantitative Image Quality Metrics Are for Physicists, Not Radiologists: How to Communicate to Your Radiologists Using Their Language

Purpose: A framework for explaining differences in image quality to non-technical audiences in medial imaging is needed. Currently, this task is something that is learned “on the job.” The lack of a formal methodology for communicating optimal acquisition parameters into the clinic effectively mitigates many technological advances. As a community, medical physicists need to be held responsible for not only advancing image science, but also for ensuring its proper use in the clinic. This work outlines a framework that bridges the gap between the results from quantitative image quality metrics like detectability, MTF, and NPS and their effect on specific anatomical structures present in diagnostic imaging tasks. Methods: Specific structures of clinical importance were identified for a body, an extremity, a chest, and a temporal bone protocol. Using these structures, quantitative metrics were used to identify the parameter space that should yield optimal image quality constrained within the confines of clinical logistics and dose considerations. The reading room workflow for presenting the proposed changes for imaging each of these structures is presented. The workflow consists of displaying images for physician review consisting of different combinations of acquisition parameters guided by quantitative metrics. Examples of using detectability index, MTF, NPS, noise and noise non-uniformity are provided. During review, the physician was forced to judge the image quality solely on those features they need for diagnosis, not on the overall “look” of the image. Results: We found that in many cases, use of this framework settled mis-agreements between physicians. Once forced to judge images on the ability to detect specific structures inter reader agreement was obtained. Conclusion: This framework will provide consulting, research/industrial, or in-house physicists with clinically relevant imaging tasks to guide reading room image review. This framework avoids use of the overall “look” or “feel” to dictate acquisition parameter selection. Equipment grants GE Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-A-210-02: HIFU: Why Should a Radiation Oncology Physicist Pay Attention?

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) has developed rapidly in recent years and is used frequently for clinical treatments in Asia and Europe with increasing clinical use and clinical trial activity in the US, making it an important medical technology with which the medical physics community must become familiar. Akin to medical devices that deliver treatments using ionizing radiation, HIFU relies on emitter geometry to non-invasively form a tight focus that can be used to affect diseased tissue while leaving healthy tissue intact. HIFU is unique in that it does not involve the use of ionizing radiation, it causes thermal necrosis in 100% of the treated tissue volume, and it has an immediate treatment effect. However, because it is an application of ultrasound energy, HIFU interacts strongly with tissue interfaces, which makes treatment planning challenging. In order to appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of HIFU as a thermal therapy, it is important to understand the underlying physics of ultrasound tissue interactions. The first lecture in the session will provide an overview of the physics of ultrasound wave propagation; the mechanism for the accumulation of heat in soft-tissue; image-guidance modalities including temperature monitoring; current clinical applications and commercial devices; active clinical trials; alternate mechanisms of action (future of FUS). The second part of the session will compare HIFU to existing ionization radiation techniques. The difficulties in defining a clear concept of absorbed dose for HIFU will be discussed. Some of the technical challenges that HIFU faces will be described, with an emphasis on how the experience of radiation oncology physicists could benefit the field. Learning Objectives: Describe the basic physics and biology of HIFU, including treatment delivery and image guidance techniques. Summarize existing and emerging clinical applications and manufacturers for HIFU. Understand that thermal ablation with HIFU is likely the first of several applications of the technology Learn about some similarities and differences between HIFU and ionizing radiation in terms of physics and biological effects. Learn about some of the technical challenges HIFU faces that might benefit from the experience of radiation oncology physicists including treatment planning improvements, quality assurance procedures, and treatment risk analysis. David Schlesinger receives research support from Elekta Instruments, AB. Matt Eames is an employee of the Focused Ultrasound Foundation which supports research and clinical trials. Dr. Eames conducts research which is supported by the Focused Ultrasound Foundation.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-G-201-01: What Therapy Physicists Need to Know About CT and PET/CT: Terminology and Latest Developments

This session will update therapeutic physicists on technological advancements and radiation oncology features of commercial CT, MRI, and PET/CT imaging systems. Also described are physicists’ roles in every stage of equipment selection, purchasing, and operation, including defining specifications, evaluating vendors, making recommendations, and optimal and safe use of imaging equipment in radiation oncology environment. The first presentation defines important terminology of CT and PET/CT followed by a review of latest innovations, such as metal artifact reduction, statistical iterative reconstruction, radiation dose management, tissue classification by dual energy CT and spectral CT, improvement in spatial resolution and sensitivity in PET, and potentials of PET/MR. We will also discuss important technical specifications and items in CT and PET/CT purchasing quotes and their impacts. The second presentation will focus on key components in the request for proposal for a MRI simulator and how to evaluate vendor proposals. MRI safety issues in radiation Oncology, including MRI scanner Zones (4-zone design), will be discussed. Basic MR terminologies, important functionalities, and advanced features, which are relevant to radiation therapy, will be discussed. In the third presentation, justification of imaging systems for radiation oncology, considerations in room design and construction in a RO department, shared use with diagnostic radiology, staffing needs and training, clinical/research use cases and implementation, will be discussed. The emphasis will be on understanding and bridging the differences between diagnostic and radiation oncology installations, building consensus amongst stakeholders for purchase and use, and integrating imaging technologies into the radiation oncology environment. Learning Objectives: Learn the latest innovations of major imaging systems relevant to radiation therapy Be able to describe important technical specifications of CT, MRI, and PET/CT Understand the process of budget request, equipment justification, comparisons of technical specifications, site visits, vendor selection, and contract development.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Herbert Fröhlich: A Physicist Ahead of His Time, by G.J. Hyland [Book Review]

This authoritative biography of Herbert Fröhlich (1905-1991), a well-known theoretical physicist, paints an intimate portrait of a pioneering scientist who made seminal contributions to condensed matter physics and left his mark on other domains such as biology over a 60-year career. From his vantage point as the last graduate student of this eminent physicist, Gerard Hyland has produced an account that weaves the personal experiences and travails of Fröhlich with detailed discussion of the theory of dielectrics. The political upheavals in Europe during the 20th century provide a dramatic backdrop for the narrative.

75 CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS, SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND↗
NASA NTRS1990

Physicists make a difference in space cryogenics

An evaluation is made of space cryogenics technology development challenges in whose treatment the unique abilities of physicists have been notably valuable. In addition to such broad concerns as the quantum properties of superfluid He, the basic laws of thermodynamics and entropy, and quantization of such fields as those of phonons and magnons, productive efforts have been made by physicists in the basic principles of SQUIDs, magnetic shielding due to the Meissner effect in superconductors, adiabatic demagnetization, and dilution cooling of He-3 and He-4. These contributions will be of fundamental importance to the IR Telescope for Space and Advanced X-ray Astronomical Facility, which are currently under development.

Petrac, D.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Thinking Bayesian for plasma physicists

Bayesian statistics offers a powerful technique for plasma physicists to infer knowledge from the heterogeneous data types encountered. To explain this power, a simple example, Gaussian Process Regression, and the application of Bayesian statistics to inverse problems are explained. The likelihood is the key distribution because it contains the data model, or theoretic predictions, of the desired quantities. By using prior knowledge, the distribution of the inferred quantities of interest based on the data given can be inferred. Because it is a distribution of inferred quantities given the data and not a single prediction, uncertainty quantification is a natural consequence of Bayesian statistics. The benefits of machine learning in developing surrogate models for solving inverse problems are discussed, as well as progress in quantitatively understanding the errors that such a model introduces.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-I-90: Medical Physicists' Implication in Diagnostic CT in Switzerland: Results of After One Year of Experience

Purpose: Since January 1st 2008, the Swiss ordinance on radiation protection requires the involvement of a medical physicist to support the optimization process of medical imaging techniques using ionizing radiation. After a long process of implementation, this requirement is satisfied all over the country since the beginning of 2013. The goal of this contribution is to summarize the main results obtained in this first year of experience in CT. Methods: We assessed the output and clinical use of 45 CT units using a three-pronged approach. First, we assessed the output of the device (CTDIvol, primary beam collimation and HU in water at different tube tensions). Secondly, we characterized the local chest and abdomen acquisition and reconstruction protocols using the Catphan 600 phantom. Lastly, we assessed the clinical use of the machine by analyzing an extract of a dozen clinical examinations per unit. Results: 9 out of 45 units had incorrect collimator settings, e.g. 4mm instead of 1mm. We witnessed also a large spread in reconstruction parameters, especially for reconstructed slice thickness, thus showing notable variations in low contrast detectability performances. Clinical practice is also clearly spread out. For example, estimated patient effective dose per abdomen examination lies at 18.7+/−12.7mSv (min: 2.0mSv — max: 112.0mSv). Chest and brain scans have a narrower dispersion, but patient effective dose is also spread by about a factor of 10 to 20. Conclusion: The spread in clinical practice being fairly large, it appears of crucial importance to collaborate more closely with radiologists and technologists to assess it. The lack of statistical precision will imply that we analyze clinical practice according to a specific medical demand rather than an anatomical region. Furthermore, low contrast sensitivity (LCD) being a crucial parameter, an objective method using a model observer will be used to assess LCD.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-A-BRD-01: MR Imaging for Treatment Planning: What Every Physicist Should Know

Ever since its introduction as a diagnostic imaging modality over 30 years ago, the radiation therapy community has acknowledged the utility of MR imaging as a tool for not only improved visualization of the target volume but also for demarcation of adjacent organs at risk. However, the adaptation of MR imaging in radiation oncology has, until recently been slow due in large part to the inability to image radiation therapy patients in their treatment position. With the introduction of so-called wide bore high field MR scanners, multi element flexible receive only RF coils, high performance imaging gradients and a range of volumetric imaging sequences it is now possible to obtain both high resolution and high signal-to-noise ratio images of in-treatment radiation therapy patients within clinically feasible imaging times. As a Result, there is renewed interest in the use of MR imaging for radiation oncology treatment planning that is being translated into physical siting and integration of these systems into radiation oncology departments. As MR imaging expands into the radiation oncology domain there is a significant and unmet need for radiation therapy physicists to become educated regarding the strengths, limitations and technical challenges associated with MR imaging. The purpose of this presentation is to address this need by providing an educational overview of the techniques and challenges associated with MR imaging of patients for radiation therapy treatment planning. As such this presentation will: 1) describe the fundamental differences between imaging of patients for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes (i.e. radiation therapy planning), 2) describe most commonly used imaging sequences and contrasts for identification of disease for radiation planning, 3) identify the most common sources of image distortion and techniques to reduce their effect on spatial fidelity of the MR data, 4) describe the effects of motion and methods to quantify/correct it, and 5) identify emergent techniques for performing MR only treatment simulation. Upon completion attendees will have a working understanding of the basic methodologies associated with MR imaging in radiation oncology, the unique technical challenges imposed by MR imaging in the treatment position and techniques to address these. Learning Objectives: 1. Understand the differences between MR imaging for diagnostic imaging and for radiation therapy planning. 2. Identify the most common sources of distortion and artifacts and simple methods to correct them. 3. Understand the challenges with MR imaging in the therapy treatment position and appropriate techniques to address them.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-CD-PinS Room/Hall E-00: HAZMAT Training for the Medical Physicist - Part I

Medical Physicists are frequently involved in shipping radioactive materials or supervising those who do. Current U.S. Department of Transportation Hazardous Material Regulations, 49 CFR Parts 171 - 185, require hazmat employees to have documented training specified in 49 CFR 172 Subpart H. A hazmat employee is defined as an individual who: (1) loads, unloads or handles hazardous material; (2) manufactures, tests, reconditions, repairs, modifies, marks or otherwise represents containers, drums or packagings as qualified for use in the transportation of hazardous materials; (3) prepares hazardous materials for transportation; (4) is responsible for safety of transporting hazardous materials; or (5) operates a vehicle used to transport hazardous materials. Recurrent training is required at least once every three years. (The IATA two-year training interval is not applicable and is generally misunderstood.) FAA has escalated inspection and enforcement. Facilities who ship radiopharmaceuticals to other laboratories, return radiopharmaceuticals or radioactive sources to suppliers, or otherwise ship radioactive materials have been cited for failure to provide and document the required training. The interrelationship of transportation regulations, 49 CFR, IATA, ICAO and other transportation regulations, which are frequently misunderstood, will be explained. The course will cover typical shipments by air and highway which are encountered in a medical institution. Items such as fissile materials, highway route controlled quantities, rail shipments, vessel shipments and such will be omitted; although specific questions may be addressed. A major objective of the course is to present the process of shipping radioactive material in a sequential and logical fashion. How radioactive materials for transportation purposes are defined by activity concentrations for exempt materials and activity limits for exempt consignments will be explained. Radioactive material shipments of excepted packages and Type A packages will be emphasized. The program is designed to meet the function specific DOT training requirements for shippers of medical radioactive materials. General awareness training and security awareness training can be obtained from two free DOT training CDs. Safety training and security awareness training is generally satisfied by the training required under the institution’s radioactive material license. For shippers of radioactive Yellow III labeled packages an in-depth written security plan and training are no longer required as of April 8, 2010. In general almost all shippers of medical radioactive material are now not required to have an in-depth security plan. Contents of general awareness training, security awareness training and in-depth security plans will be briefly outlined. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to ensure that each hazmat employee is properly trained. No third party can fulfill that requirement. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to determine the degree to which this course meets the employer’s requirements, including contents of the course and the examination. Participants will gain sufficient knowledge to prepare hazmat training programs for others in their institutions. A handout will be posted which should be printed out and brought to the course for reference during the presentation. The handout will also satisfy part of the training documentation required by DOT. A feature handout section is a composite table which provides A1, A2, RQ, Exempt Concentration, and Exempt Consignment values in a single table in both Becquerel and Curie units. Course attendance will be certified through the AAPM CEU documentation system. Learning Objectives: Understand the regulatory requirements for shipping radioactive materials. Understand the regulatory requirements for training of hazmat employees. Comprehend how to classify, package, mark, label, document, placard, and transport radioactive materials.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-G-PinS Room/Hall E-00: HAZMAT Training for the Medical Physicist - Part II

Medical Physicists are frequently involved in shipping radioactive materials or supervising those who do. Current U.S. Department of Transportation Hazardous Material Regulations, 49 CFR Parts 171 - 185, require hazmat employees to have documented training specified in 49 CFR 172 Subpart H. A hazmat employee is defined as an individual who: (1) loads, unloads or handles hazardous material; (2) manufactures, tests, reconditions, repairs, modifies, marks or otherwise represents containers, drums or packagings as qualified for use in the transportation of hazardous materials; (3) prepares hazardous materials for transportation; (4) is responsible for safety of transporting hazardous materials; or (5) operates a vehicle used to transport hazardous materials. Recurrent training is required at least once every three years. (The IATA two year training interval is not applicable and is generally misunderstood.) FAA has escalated inspection and enforcement. Facilities who ship radiopharmaceuticals to other laboratories, return radiopharmaceuticals or radioactive sources to suppliers, or otherwise ship radioactive materials have been cited for failure to provide and document the required training. The interrelationship of transportation regulations, 49 CFR, IATA, ICAO and other transportation regulations, which are frequently misunderstood, will be explained. The course will cover typical shipments by air and highway which are encountered in a medical institution. Items such as fissile materials, highway route controlled quantities, rail shipments, vessel shipments and such will be omitted; although specific questions may be addressed. A major objective of the course is to present the process of shipping radioactive material in a sequential and logical fashion. How radioactive materials for transportation purposes are defined by activity concentrations for exempt materials and activity limits for exempt consignments will be explained. Radioactive material shipments of excepted packages and Type A packages will be emphasized. The program is designed to meet the function specific DOT training requirements for shippers of medical radioactive materials. General awareness training and security awareness training can be obtained from two free DOT training CDs. Safety training and security awareness training is generally satisfied by the training required under the institution’s radioactive material license. For shippers of radioactive Yellow III labeled packages an in-depth written security plan and training are no longer required as of April 8, 2010. In general almost all shippers of medical radioactive material are now not required to have an in-depth security plan. Contents of general awareness training, security awareness training and in-depth security plans will be briefly outlined. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to ensure that each hazmat employee is properly trained. No third party can fulfill that requirement. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to determine the degree to which this course meets the employer’s requirements, including contents of the course and the examination. Participants will gain sufficient knowledge to prepare hazmat training programs for others in their institutions. A handout will be posted which should be printed out and brought to the course for reference during the presentation. The handout will also satisfy part of the training documentation required by DOT. A feature handout section is a composite table which provides A1, A2, RQ, Exempt Concentration, and Exempt Consignment values in a single table in both Becquerel and Curie units. Course attendance will be certified through the AAPM CEU documentation system. Learning Objectives: Understand the regulatory requirements for shipping radioactive materials. Understand the regulatory requirements for training of hazmat employees. Comprehend how to classify, package, mark, label, document, placard, and transport radioactive materials.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

MO-DE-BRA-05: EUTEMPE-RX: Combining E-Learning and Face-To-Face Training to Build Expert Knowledge, Skills and Competences for Medical Physicists in Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology

Purpose: In 2013, the EURATOM authorities of the European Commission decided to support the Horizon2020 project submission ‘EUTEMPE-RX’ that aimed for a new set of course modules to train medical physicists in diagnostic and interventional radiology to expert level with small group deep learning. Each module would consist of 2 phases: an e-learning and a face-to-face phase, each phase requiring typically 40h of participant time. Methods: The European Federation (EFOMP) and 13 European partners, all of them selected for their excellent scientific and/or educational skills, led the 12 course modules. A quality manual ensured the quality of course content and organization. Educational workshops familiarized the teachers with e-learning techniques and methods for assessment. Content was set in accordance with the EC document RP174 that lists learning outcomes in terms of knowledge, skills and competences (KSCs) for different specialties and levels of medical physics. Surveys for stake holder satisfaction were prepared. Results: Today the course modules are being realized. The modules cover most of the KSCs in RP174 document. Teachers have challenged the participants with unique tasks: case studies in medical physics leadership, Monte Carlo simulation of a complete x-ray imaging chain, development of a task specific QA protocol, compilation of optimization plans, simulation tasks with anthropomorphic breast models, etc. Participants undertook practical sessions in modern hospitals and visited a synchrotron facility, a calibration lab, screening organizations, etc. Feedback form quality surveys was very positive and constructive. A sustainability plan has been worked out. Conclusion: The modules have enabled the participants to develop their KSCs and cope with challenges in medical physics. The sustainability plan will be implemented to continue the unique combined e-learning and face to face training at high level training in diagnostic and interventional radiology also beyond Europe. The EUTEMPE-RX project is funded by the Horizon2020 - EURATOM program of the European Commission.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

A Certified Health Physicist’s Reflections on a 40-Year Career in Radiation Protection

This is a reflection from a certified health physicist regarding his becoming aware, during his 40-year career, that the linear no-threshold (LNT) model and the associated As Low As Reasonably Achievable concept have no scientific basis and make no positive contribution to radiation safety. They should be replaced by an alternative, scientifically based model that includes a threshold, below which there is no harm, and recognition of hormesis and the adaptive response, which reflect the benefits of low-dose and low-dose-rate radiation exposure. Continued use of the unscientific LNT model is not conservative, as most regulators complacently claim but actually harmful. Examples of these harmful impacts in the areas of nuclear power, nuclear medicine, and environmental management are included.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗