Radiation Safety Measures and Metrics That Matter

0
0
1722 days ago, 605 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Radiation Wellbeing Measures and Measurements That Matter!. Robert Emery, DrPH, CHP, CIH, CSP, RBP, CHMM, CPP, ARM VP for Wellbeing, Wellbeing, Environment and Danger Administration The College of Texas Wellbeing Science Center at Houston Partner Teacher of Word related Wellbeing

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

Radiation Safety Measures and Metrics That Matter! Robert Emery, DrPH, CHP, CIH, CSP, RBP, CHMM, CPP, ARM Vice President for Safety, Health, Environment & Risk Management The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston Associate Professor of Occupational Health The University of Texas School of Public Health

Slide 2

Objectives Part 1: Identify and group the diverse sorts of measures gathered by radiation security programs Differentiate between program measures and measurements Discuss how these measures might be utilized Part 2: Examine the science and specialty of powerful information shows Identify the essential attributes of compelling information shows Review genuine prior and then afterward "make overs" of real automatic information shows

Slide 3

Why Training on Measures? An intriguing difficulty: Radiation security programs blossom with information Virtually every imperative radiation wellbeing choice depends on information to some degree Formal preparing in the zone of convincing information introductions is to some degree uncommon for radiation wellbeing experts The capacity to compellingly show information is the way to fancied basic leadership

Slide 4

Why Training on Data Presentation (cont.)? The radiation security calling is flooded with terrible cases of information introductions! We've all persisted them sooner or later in our vocations! Discourse: This might be the explanation behind rehashed experiences with administration who don't comprehend what their radiation security programs do.

Slide 5

Radiation Safety Program Measures Step 1. Genuine field estimations Radiation presentation levels, rates Radiation dosage levels, rates Amounts of radioactivity Other perspectives – separate, mass, zone Step 2. Automatic measures Indicators of workload Number of standard specialists Number of approved labs Lab examinations Indicators of program results Regulatory assessment results? Real dosages got? In abundance of ALARA breaking points? Note – what is the materialness of this data to the yearly Radiation Protection Program survey?

Slide 6

Radiation Safety Program Measures Step 3: Programmatic measurements Comparing information to major hierarchical drivers, for example, Institutional extramural research uses? Tolerant incomes? Institutional square film? Case of the force of measurements: What does the permit/enrollment cost versus what is it worth?

Slide 7

Radiation Safety Program Measures Step 4: Actually introducing or conveying the information to others Some key inquiries: To whom may we be showing your information to? Will these distinctive partners comprehend or fathom what you're attempting to state? To what extent do you commonly need to recount your story?

Slide 8

How Do We Achieve Data Display Excellence? The objective is to present complex thoughts and ideas in ways that are Clear Precise Efficient How would we approach accomplishing this?

Slide 9

Go to The Experts On Information Display Tukey, JW, Exploratory Data Analysis , Reading, MA 1977 Tukey, PA, Tukey, JW Summarization: smoothing; supplemented sees, in Vic Barnett ed. Deciphering Multivariate Data , Chichester, England, 1982 Tufte, ER, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , Cheshire, CT, 2001 Tufte, ER, Envisioning Information , Cheshire, CT, 1990 Tufte, ER, Visual Explanations , Cheshire, CT, 1997

Slide 10

Sample Recommendations Don't indiscriminately depend on the programmed realistic organizing gave by Excel or Powerpoint! Endeavor to make expansive informational collections cognizant Encourage the eye to analyze distinctive information Representations of numbers ought to be straightforwardly relative to their numerical amounts Use clear, itemized, and exhaustive marking

Slide 11

Sample Recommendations (cont.) Display the variety of information, not a variety of configuration Maximize the information to ink proportion – set the majority of the ink to work telling about the information! Whenever possible, utilize level design: half more extensive than tall is generally best

Slide 12

Compelling Tufte Remark Visual thinking happens all the more successfully when pertinent data is demonstrated neighboring in the space inside our eye-traverse This is particularly valid for factual information where the major investigative act is to make examinations The key point: "contrasted with what?"

Slide 13

Three UTHSCH "Make Over" Examples Data we aggregated and showed on: Nuisance Fire Alarms Workers pay encounter modifiers Corridor leeway But initial, 2 snappy notes: The gathering to be utilized: The "wide screen" versus the "little screen"? In what setting are most vital choices made? Like mold, there are likely no correct answers – singular tastes apply, yet some widespread guidelines will get to be distinctly evident

Slide 14

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 15

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 16

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 17

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 18

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 19

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 20

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 21

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge (FY04) Fiscal Year 04

Slide 22

Results of the Great UTHSC-H Nuisance Fire Alarm Challenge

Slide 23

UT-Tyler UTMB UT-SA MDA UT-H UT-SW Employee Worker's Comp Experience Modifier contrasted with other UT wellbeing segments, FY 98-FY 04 Rate of "1" industry normal, speaking to $1 premium per $100

Slide 24

Worker's Compensation Insurance Premium Adjustment for UTS Health Components Fiscal Years 2002 to 2007 (markdown premium rating when contrasted with a benchmark of 1, three year moving normal modifies rates for ensuing year) UT Health Center Tyler (0.45) UT Medical Branch Galveston (0.35) UT HSC San Antonio (0.25) UT Southwestern Dallas (0.20) UT HSC Houston (0.16) UT MD Anderson Cancer Center (0.11) 3 year time frame whereupon premium is computed

Slide 26

MSB Corridor Blockage in Cumulative Occluded Linear Feet, by Month and Floor (building floor showed at beginning of each line) 7 th 6 th 5 th 4 th 3 rd 2 nd 1 st G 2005 2004

Slide 27

Three Radiation-particular Examples Three illustrations: 1. Conveying to room inhabitants their conceivable radiation exposures 2. Imparting to the radiation security board and upper administration the limit of our expansive extension permit 3. Conveying to upper administration general radiation wellbeing patterns

Slide 28

Example 1: Area Radiation Levels Upset authoritative laborers being put in new working environment 3D square homestead close source stockpiling territory Area observing obediently performed, yet unimportant information printout gave Future tenants still concerned

Slide 29

Figure 1. Recorded radiation measurements in mrem/yr on inside dividers of vault room when contrasted with administrative breaking points, as recorded by range dosimeters set up for timetable year 2004 Occupational dosage restrict 5,000 mrem/yr, past 360 mrem/yr foundation dosage level General open cutoff 100 mrem/yr past foundation dosage level of 360 mrem/yr Background radiation dosage level 360 mrem/yr

Slide 30

Example 2: Broad Scope License Capacity Upper administration for different foundations does not comprehend the idea of a "wide permit" Such comprehension is imperative for kept subsidizing for both allow expenses and bolster exercises

Slide 32

Example 3: 10 Year Prospectus Various partners don't comprehend radiation wellbeing program exercises and how they identify with research venture

Slide 34

Important Caveats Although the methods showed here are intense, there are a few drawbacks to this approach Time required to make collect information and make non-standard diagrams may not work with work requests Relentless tinkering and imaginative judgment Suggested hotspots for normal perceptions to build up an instinctive feel for the procedure Suggested predictable wellspring of good illustrations: Wall Street Journal Suggested steady wellspring of not very great cases: USA Today "scorch toons"

Slide 35

Summary The capacity to show information compellingly is the way to craved basic leadership Always foresee "contrasted with what?" Maximize the information to-ink proportion – e.g. take out the superfluous Think about what it is you're attempting to state Show to others new to the subject without talking – does this recount the story we're attempting to tell?

Slide 36

Your Questions now? Presently Let's Look at Some Other Examples

Slide 37

COLLABORATIVE LABORATORY INSPECTION PROGRAM (CLIP) During October 2005, 80 Principle Investigators for a sum of 316 research center rooms were assessed An aggregate of 30 CLIP reviews were performed PI Inspections:

Slide 38

Comprehensive Laboratory Inspection Program (CLIP) Activities and Outcomes, 2005 Month in Number of Principle Inspections Year 2005 Investigators Inspected Without Violations With Violations May 94 53 (56 %) 41 (44%) June 78 40 (51%) 38 (49%) July 84 54 (64%) 30 (36%) August 74 54 (73%) 20 (27%) September 69 39 (56%) 30 (44%) October 80 50 (62%) 30 (38%)

Slide 39

2005 Collaborative Laboratory Inspection Program (CLIP) Inspection Activities and Compliance Findings Number without infringement Number with infringement

Slide 40

2005 Collaborati

SPONSORS