[ RadSafe ] Hospital workers subjected to excessive radiation, lawsuits claim

Tue Jan 21 17:30:26 CST 2014

We also don't know what material the wall with no lead was made of, the occupancy factor for the room behind that wall, the distance from the CT system to the occupied area, etc.  It may be that added lead was not required. We don't know. Let us wait for more information.

Bob C
---- "KARAM wrote: 
> This really leaves me with mixed feelings. On the one hand, as everyone has said, the lack of shielding is a huge oversight that should have been caught. On the other hand, I tend to be dubious about claims of radiation injury until I know something about the doses to which people were exposed. 
> 
> Before accepting the claims that seizures, birth defects, etc. are due to the lack of shielding I think I'd want to make some dose measurements and perform a formal dose reconstruction. Without making the measurements and doing the math we just can't know if this is only an inexcusable mistake in CT room design, or if it also hurt people.
> 
> Andy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of S L Gawarecki
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 11:58 AM
> To: Franz Schönhofer
> Cc: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Hospital workers subjected to excessive radiation, lawsuits claim
> 
> What makes this story even more jaw-dropping is that Methodist Medical
> Center is located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, one of the original Manhattan
> Project sites, home of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and birthplace of
> health physics.  Of course the facility is in violation of the strict
> standards specified by the state of Tennessee which enforces federal
> requirements in this area.
> 
> This is what can happen when there is no oversight of a contractor's work.
> Someone with a radiation safety background should have verified the
> installation of shielding.
> 
> Regards,
> *Susan Gawarecki*
> 
> ph: 865-494-0102
> cell:  865-604-3724
> SLGawarecki at gmail.com
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Franz Schönhofer <
> franz.schoenhofer at chello.at> wrote:
> 
> > Dear all,
> > I am somehow privileged, that I happen to know Susan personally. Yes it is
> > her first name, Gawarecki cannot be a first name!
> >
> > This article itself really bothers me a lot. I have been working with the
> > Austrian Standard on shielding of rooms, where radiation is used for
> > medical purposes. There we defined all the conditions necessary to prevent
> > any radiation harm to both patients and people outside the area of
> > radiation application. It was more or less what has been followed since
> > years by the hospitals. Whether these conditions are met is controlled
> > yearly. No such installation will be permitted to be installed or operating
> > without a control that all requirements are met.
> >
> > Is this really USA-specific? I remember this "Rumsfeld", who called many
> > European countries (explicitely Austria) as "old", because we did not send
> > fighting troops to Afghanistan (which is btw prohibited by our
> > constitution). If this article is true - I am not convinced - then there is
> > a lack of oversight and licensing. Otherwise it would not be difficult to
> > fend off these claims.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Franz
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: ROY HERREN
> > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 8:48 PM
> > To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Hospital workers subjected to excessive
> > radiation,lawsuits claim
> >
> > Susan (at least I think that is your first name),
> >
> >    I really appreciate receiving this article.  In my experience working
> > at a hospital it is all too common for the sales people to make statements
> > that will lead the purchaser to under estimate the expenses involved with
> > the installation of a major pieces of equipment such as a CT.
> >  Additionally, often time the folks in Radiology pushing the acquisition
> > and the hospital's engineering project personnel fail to include the
> > Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) or Medical Physicist in the earliest stages
> > of acquisition and planning, and then when the project is in the middle of
> > construction the engineers will complain that it's too expensive to issue a
> > change order for the project.  The RSO or the Medical Physicist can't very
> > well give professional advise on projects if they aren't included anywhere
> > in the acquisition, planning and construction process.  In other words, if
> > the radiation safety professionals are left in the dark about acquisition
> > and
> > construction this is an example of what happens.
> >
> >
> >    Based on the article, it appears that this CT suite was constructed
> > without a shielding plan, and that a post-construction shielding survey
> > wasn't performed.  I find it hard to believe that this is in accordance
> > with Tennessee state law.  I'd have to dig through the American Association
> > of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) publications, but I am fairly certain this
> > isn't in accordance with AAPM standards, please see
> > http://www.aapm.org/meetings/07ss/documents/Stevensshielding.pdf
> >
> >
> > Roy Herren
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: S L Gawarecki <slgawarecki at gmail.com>
> > To: RadSafe <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:23 AM
> > Subject: [ RadSafe ] Hospital workers subjected to excessive radiation,
> > lawsuits claim
> >
> >
> >
> > Hospital workers subjected to excessive radiation, lawsuits claim
> >
> > OAK RIDGE - Hospital technologists were exposed to excessive radiation at
> > Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge, five lawsuits filed this week
> > allege.
> >
> > A wall between the CT scan room and the control room in the hospital's new
> > Emergency Department area lacked a lead-lined barrier to stop the
> > radiation, according to the Anderson County Circuit Court complaints.
> >
> > Computer tomography, or CT scans, involve computer-processed X-rays that
> > are used to diagnose ailments.
> >
> > CT scans are "exponentially more powerful" than conventional X-rays, said
> > Clinton attorney John Agee, who filed the lawsuits.
> >
> > Technologists in the control room behind the wall that lacked lead lining
> > were repeatedly exposed to scatter radiation, Agee said.
> >
> > Excessive radiation exposure can lead to cancer.
> >
> > Several of those technologists now have symptoms "that would be compatible
> > with radiation exposure," the attorney said.
> >
> > They will now have to take regular health screens for cancer, he said. Some
> > symptoms of excessive radiation exposure take years to develop, Agee said.
> >
> > He said family members waiting in a nearby room for relatives undergoing CT
> > scans may also have been exposed to the scatter radiation.
> >
> > "There's a difference between 40 exposures in a shift," Agee said of the
> > technologists' situations, "as opposed to one."
> >
> > Agee said it's "most likely that another 10 lawsuits are going to be
> > filed," with most of them on behalf of current and former X-ray and
> > radiologic technologists.
> >
> > Two of the first five plaintiffs are women who were pregnant at the time of
> > their alleged exposures. At least one child born after the exposures "is
> > suffering from a severe illness," said Agee's wife, Clinton attorney Lea
> > Ellen RidenourAgee.
> >
> > "The whole thing is just heartbreaking," she said.
> >
> > John Agee said that after it was discovered last month that lead lining was
> > missing from the wall, "not a whole lot of information has been voluntarily
> > given to these people, and they're obviously concerned about their health."
> >
> > "I hate it for these people," he said. "To me it's hard to understand why
> > it happened."
> >
> > Named as defendants in the initial lawsuits, filed Monday, are Covenant
> > Health of Knoxville, which operates Methodist Medical Center, Rentenbach
> > Constructors Inc. of Knoxville, the contractor that built the hospital's
> > new emergency department that opened in February 2006, and TEG Architects
> > LLC, the Jeffersonville, Ind., firm that designed the project.
> >
> > Hospital spokeswoman Crystal D. Jordan said Methodist Medical Center
> > strongly refutes the accusations.
> >
> > "We maintain an active and ongoing radiation quality and compliance program
> > with specific procedures to monitor safety.
> >
> > "Base on the results of this program, it has been verified that we have met
> > all safety standards for radiation exposure," Jordan stated in an email.
> >
> > John Agee said concerns began emerging when X-rays stored in a room next to
> > the CT scanning Room "became cloudy from scatter radiation."
> >
> > Lea Ellen Agee said technologists "attempted to take an X-ray through the
> > wall, and were successful."
> >
> > An employee of General Electric "came in and took some measurements in some
> > adjoining rooms," John Agee said, "and conveyed to Methodist there was a
> > problem."
> >
> > Lea Ellen Agee said the suspect wall was torn down in December, and the
> > lack of lead lining was confirmed then.
> >
> > John Agee said a former radiological technologist at Methodist Medical
> > Center, Clinton resident Mike Phillips, told him about the situation.
> >
> > Phillips is one of the first five plaintiffs, along with two current
> > radiological technologists, Keith Gillis of Knoxville and Mary Ridenour of
> > Andersonville, who was pregnant at the time she was subjected to the
> > scatter radiation.
> >
> > Also filing suit were current X-ray technologists Connie Raby of Clinton
> > and Micah Noelle Lewellen of Knoxville, who also allegedly received
> > excessive radiation throughout her pregnancy.
> >
> > Phillips and Raby in their lawsuits allege they have had "thyroid problems,
> > headaches, trouble sleeping and other problems. "
> >
> > Gillis has had seizures and memory loss, while Lewellen has "significant
> > medical problems, according to their complaints.
> >
> > The lawsuits state the defendants failed to have qualified personnel check
> > on the installation of lead barriers, and that federal and state standards
> > about radiation exposure were violated.
> >
> > The complaints seek compensatory and punitive damages, but no specific
> > amounts are listed.
> > http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2014/jan/17/hospital-workers-
> > subjected-to-excessive-lawsuits/
> >
> > Regards,
> > *Susan Gawarecki*
> >
> >
> > ph: 865-494-0102
> > cell:  865-604-3724
> > SLGawarecki at gmail.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> > the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/
> > radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> > visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> > the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/
> > radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> > visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> >
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu