Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Home | About IJNM | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Ahead of Print | Online submissionLogin 
Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 773 Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 32  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 173-176

Influence of decontaminating agents and swipe materials on laboratory simulated working surfaces wet spilled with sodium pertechnetate

Department of Nuclear Medicine, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Bhushan Shivanand
Department of Nuclear Medicine, School of Allied Health Sciences Manipal University, Manipal, Karnataka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijnm.IJNM_1_17

Rights and Permissions

Context: Decontamination of various working surfaces with sodium pertechnetate minor spillage is essential for maintaining good radiation safety practices as well as for regulatory compliance. Aim: To observe the influences of decontaminating agents and swipe materials on different type of surfaces used in nuclear medicine laboratory work area wet spilled with 99m-technetium (99mTc) sodium pertechnetate. Settings and Design: Lab-simulated working surface materials. Experimental study design. Materials and Methods: Direct decontamination method on dust-free lab simulated new working surfaces [stainless steel, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), Perspex, resin] using four decontaminating agents [tap water, soap water (SW), Radiacwash, and spirit] with four different swipe material [cotton, tissue paper (TP), Whatman paper (WP), adsorbent sheet (AS)] was taken 10 samples (n = 10) for each group. Statistical Analysis: Parametric test two-way analysis of variance is used with significance level of 0.005, was used to evaluate statistical differences between different group of decontaminating agent and swipe material, and the results are expressed in mean ± SD. Results: Decontamination factor is calculated after five cleaning for each group. A total of 160 samples result calculated using four decontaminating agent (tap water, SW, Radiacwash, and spirit), four swipe material (cotton, TP, WP, and AS) for commonly used surface (stainless steel, PVC, Perspex, resin) using direct method by 10 samples (n = 10) for each group. Conclusions: Tap water is the best decontaminating agent compared with SW, Radiac wash and spirit for the laboratory simulated stainless steel, PVC, and Perspex surface material, whereas in case of resin surface material, SW decontaminating agent is showing better effectiveness. Cotton is the best swipe material compared to WP-1, AS and TP for the stainless steel, PVC, Perspex, and resin laboratory simulated surface materials. Perspex and stainless steel are the most suitable and recommended laboratory surface material compared to PVC and resin in nuclear medicine. Radiacwash may show better result for 99mTc labelled product and other radionuclide contamination on the laboratory working surface area.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded205    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal