EPR Dosimetry of Chernobyl Liquidators
Vadim CHUMAK
Scientific Center for Radiation Medicine, AMS Ukraine, Kyiv
04050 Melnikova, 53, Kiev, Ukraine: chumak@leed1.kiev.ua

Abstract
The paper is devoted to review of development and application of EPR dosimetry with teeth in
Ukraine. It deals with specific features of the EPR dosimetry protocol, which was developed and ispractically used in SCRM for retrospective dosimetry of clean-up workers (liquidators). Extensive
methodological research was conducted in SCRM in order to develop an original version of EPR
dosimetric protocol as well as to investigate the effects caused by confounding factors and develop
approaches to their account and mitigation. The proposed EPR dosimetric protocol addresses thedemand for high accuracy and reproducibility, low sensitivity threshold as well as high throughputof the technique. High qualities of SCRM version of EPR protocol were proven in the course ofelaborate quality assurance program, which included a series of international intercomparisons.
Creation and continuous operation of the nationwide tooth acquisition network is another key to thesuccess of EPR dosimetry in Ukraine.
Particular attention in the paper is paid to definition of the most optimal way of application of
EPR dosimetry for dosimetric support of the post-Chernobyl medical follow-up. The main
applications of EPR dosimetry in Ukraine are both routine high precision reconstruction of doses toChernobyl clean-up workers and the use of EPR dose estimates as a reference dose for validation ofother retrospective dosimetry techniques. The latter proved to be the most efficient application of
EPR dosimetry in the post-Chernobyl situation. EPR dosimetry was used for testing such methodsof retrospective dosimetry as FISH, ADR, SEAD and RADRUE. Nowadays EPR dosimetry plays
inevitable role in dosimetric support of the post-Chernobyl medical follow-up studies.

Introduction
The Chernobyl accident and obvious failure of routine dosimetric monitoring of clean-up workers(liquidators) had stimulated significant development of various methods of retrospective dosimetry.
Among those methods one of the most adequate proved to be an EPR dosimetry with teeth. Over last
decade EPR dosimetry made all way from unique experimental technique to the tool of routine dosereconstruction. Many different applications are known for EPR dosimetry with teeth. It was used for
determination of doses received in course of radiotherapy [1], dose reconstruction for atomic workers [2]as well as in several cases of accidental exposure [3-7]. In recent years, several review papers [8-11] andone book [12] were published dealing with various aspects of EPR dosimetry. Notable role in the processof development and implementation of this method belongs to the research performed in Scientific Center
for Radiation Medicine (SCRM) AMS Ukraine, in particular to the work performed in collaboration withleading laboratories worldwide [8, 13-21].
This paper is dealing with some specific features of the EPR dosimetry protocol which wasdeveloped and is practically used in SCRM, briefly touches results of investigations performed in thisinstitute, and concentrates to a larger extent on practical applications, which EPR dosimetry had found in
Ukraine. Particular attention in the paper is paid to definition of the most optimal way of application of
EPR dosimetry for dosimetric support of the post-Chernobyl medical follow-up.

1231. Methodological aspects of EPR dosimetry with teeth
1.1. EPR dosimetric protocol, SCRM version
In general, any version of EPR dosimetric technique comprises several distinctive steps or stages.
This includes collection of samples, sample preparation, recording and decomposition of EPR spectra,
determination of cumulative dose and assessment of accidental exposure component, and assessment of
uncertainty. It should be stressed that presently no single standard EPR technique exists. Combination ofparticular solutions concerning each element of this technique determines unique protocols, which arepracticed in each individual laboratory. Herewith we will briefly discuss an EPR dosimetric protocol,
which was developed and is being routinely used in SCRM AMS Ukraine. This protocol in more details is
described elsewhere [13]. The aforementioned sequence of steps as well as peculiar features of the SCRM
protocol are schematically presented at Fig.1. In may be seen, that quite significant modification wereintroduced into the generic scheme of EPR dosimetry with teeth. In our presentation we will follow the
logical scheme as presented at Fig.1.
Collection of samples. Sample collection is an inevitable element of EPR dosimetry with teeth. Obviously,
due to ethical considerations, extraction of teeth solely for dosimetric purposes is impossible. Therefore,
only teeth, which are being extracted by medical prescriptions in the course of routine dental practice, may
be collected and used for retrospective dosimetry. This consideration substantially reduces possibility toobtain dosimetric bioporobes (teeth) from the subjects, which are significant from the point of view offollow-up and thus dose reconstruction. Moreover, it should be taken into account that even sound molar
contains only about 300-500 mg of enamel, while in practice significantly damaged teeth are extracted,
having, respectively, much less enamel.
Obviously, teeth of Chernobyl clan-up workers are the unique and unrecoverable resource. The
problem may be solved by organizing and operation of a widespread network for collection of teeth(desirably - all!), which are extracted by medical prescriptions from the liquidators. In order to securecollection of teeth from maximum number of exposed individuals, tooth collection network branches were
established in 7 oblasts (regions) of Ukraine, which have the highest liquidator population. The structureof this network and respective flow-chart are presented at Fig.2. The teeth collected in various dentistryclinics within the given oblasts are collected in the regional hub and then, periodically, are forwarded to!
!
!

! Subtraction of the instrumental background signal! Source of the standard of background signal of enamel: mixture of
non-irradiated teeth from young people2+! Use of Mn :MgO standard for adjustment of magnetic field position! Manipulation with background and measured signals by varying
amplitude under fixed g-factor and width of signals! Radiation induced signal intensity determined as peak-to-peakamplitude

RECORDINGOF EPR
SPECTRA!
!
!

DECONVOLUTION
OF EPR SPECTRA!

!
!

DETERMINATIONOF CUMULATIVE
DOSE

!

!

EVALUATION OFTHE"ACCIDENTAL"
DOSE

!
!
!
!

Fig.1. SCRM version of EPR dosimetric protocol.
124

Kiev to the central bioprobe bank. Here the collected teeth are registered and logged into a database, and,after input inspection and estimation of quality, are placed into the bank for long-term storage. Later, upon
specific request, some samples are retrieved from the storage and are used for dose reconstruction. The
results of EPR dosimetry are used in a number of occasions - more detailed discussion of application areas
for EPR dosimetry is given below. In principle, as depicted in Fig.2, routine dose reconstruction could be
performed in several accredited EPR laboratories. However, so far such routine dose reconstruction is
performed in only one institution, namely Scientific Center for Radiation Medicine AMS Ukraine.
Since reconstruction of individual doses is concerned, some personal data need to be acquired in thecourse of tooth collection. This is achieved by filling out a special ID form, so called "Tooth passport".
This form consists of three main sections. First of all, contact and personal data is registered, allowing to
identify the tooth donor and, if needed, reestablish personal contact with him. Respectively, the firstsection includes the name of the clinics where the tooth was extracted and registration number of a person,
full name, year of birth and year of clean-up work in Chernobyl as well as contact telephone number(s). In
the second section of the tooth ID form all instances of lifetime exposure, both occupational and medical
are recorded. The third section contains characteristics of the extracted tooth, in particular its position in amouth and reason of extraction (diagnosis). Passport of tooth is filled out by a dentist prior to extraction of
tooth and it accompanies the sample until it arrives into the central bioprobe bank and passes check-in to
the respective database. In the course of practical collection of teeth the tooth ID form was substantiallymodified, being reduced only to the most essential entries. It was demonstrated that any additional
information could be acquired, if needed, by the secondary contact with liquidator.
Although legal grounds for establishment of the tooth acquisition network were laid in 1997, thiseffort came to active phase in 1999, when appropriate funding was put in place. In 2001 the network was
expanded, incorporating two more oblasts of Ukraine, increasing their count to seven. In total, since thebeginning of operation of the tooth acquisition network, about 4000 teeth were collected and checked into
Emergency Ministryof Ukraine

Chernigiv

Dnipropetrovsk

Poltava

Kharkiv

Health Ministryof Ukraine

Cherkasy

Zaporizhya

Usersof dosimetric information

Central bioprobe bank.. conservation. storage
preparation. sample
access for analysis

EPR-dosimetry
methodologicalcenter

Database section.
.
..

Bioprobe section. epidemiologists. physicians. social services. exposed individuals

registration of incoming probes
tracing of the samples
storage of reconstructed doses
retrieval and output of doses

EPR-dosimetry 1

Kyiv

EPR-dosimetry 2

EPR-dosimetry 3

Fig.2. Structure and operation flowchart of the tooth acquisition network in Ukraine.

125Grade123456Table 1. Quality grades of teeth and percentage in the pool of collected samples.
Percentage in the
Characteristics of a tooth
Applicability for EPR dosimetry
pool of collected
teeth
Tooth roots (including fragments),
Not applicable24
enamel is absent
Insufficient amount of enamel(10-20%), teeth under metal Practically not applicable
11
crown
Incisors, canines
Practically not applicable
17
Molars and premolars with 20Applicable if dose is high10
50% of enamel
Applicable, could be limitation in
Molars and premolars with more
21
terms of separate buccal andthan 50% of enamellingual part analysis
Intact crown and root
Unlimited applicability
17

the bioprobe bank.
Intermediate and long-term preservation and storage of teeth is a separate issue. Study of various
storage media (ethanol, formaldehyde, Nikiforov's mixture - 50% alcohol+50% ether) had revealed thatfrom the point of view of biological decontamination, pre-treatment of enamel and absence of destructive
effect on EPR spectra, the most appropriate medium is Nikiforov's mixture. However, from the practicalpoint of view, use of liquid storage media is quite difficult, requiring supply of robust vials, readysolutions and complicated transportation of the collected samples. Therefore for operation of thewidespread tooth acquisition network the simplified pre-storage protocol was proposed. According to thisprotocol, extracted tooth is washed and disinfected in formaldehyde, rinsed in large amount of tap water,
and then dried at room temperature and sealed in a paper envelope with the tooth ID form being stapled toit. It was demonstrated that a sample processed in such manner is being dried to the appropriate degree on
the way to the central bioprobe bank. According to Ukrainian legislation, extracted teeth are notconsidered as human organs or sources of biological hazard - this significantly simplifies the legal aspectsof the described procedures.
Obviously, there are certain aspects, which are significant from the point of view of dosereconstruction, in particular amount of available enamel or position of tooth (front teeth are not usable fordose reconstruction due to large and uncontrollable contribution of solar UV exposure into dosimetricsignal. In order to formalize qualitative evaluation of incoming teeth and facilitated retrieval of
appropriate samples from the bioprobe bank, a ranking system was designed in SCRM. All teeth areassigned with certain grades according to their status. The ranking criteria as well as distribution of thecollected samples by the quality grades are presented in Table 1. One may see that only about half ofcollected samples have grades-4 to -6 and thus are appropriate for dose reconstruction; the highest grade 6 have only about 17% of collected teeth and therefore only these samples are good for high precisiondose reconstruction using two halves of a tooth and detection of lifetime x-ray irradiation.
Upon incoming registration, each of the samples is examined and the grade is assigned. This
information is recorded in the database, significantly facilitating subsequent use of the collected material.
For instance, in the course of high precision dose reconstruction needed for provision of reference quality
dose estimates, only teeth having grade-6 are pulled from the bioprobe bank and used for EPR dosimetry.
In general, the system of formalized quality assessment of the collected samples proved to be very
efficient instrument for management of the bioprobe bank and sensible use of collected teeth.
Sample preparation. If reconstruction of low doses (below 0.5 Gy) is concerned, sample preparation
plays the key role. As shown in Fig.3, for doses below 0.5 Gy dosimetric signal appears as quite small
126

4

4
1
2

4

4
3

4

Н, 10 TFig.3. Typical EPR spectrum of tooth enamel exposed to dose 0.8 Gy.
1 - recorded (original) spectrum
2 - standard signal of native (background) signal
3 - dosimetric signal (difference of 1 and 2)
4 - lines of Mn2+:MgO spectrometric standard, used for calibration of gfactor and intensity of EPR signals
A - first maximum of dosimetric signal
B - first minimum of dosimetric signal

addition to the more intense background (native) signal. Obviously, improvement of this "signal to noise"ratio is an effective way of enhancement of the sensitivity of the method. Basically, this may be achievedby purification of the sample and reduction of the background signal
It is known that dosimetric signal is associated with mineral component of tooth, while native signals
are usually associated with organic component of tooth. In fact, the ratio of mineral to organic components
in enamel and dentine is 95:5 and 70:30, respectively. Therefore, rigorous separation of enamel fromdentine is one of the key issues in the sample preparation process. The most straightforward method ismechanical removal of softer dentine from the tooth crown using hard alloy dental drill. Although thisapproach is widely used [22-25], it is not perfect. First of all, this method is extremely labor intensive andhas relatively low throughput. High skills of operator are required for efficient removal of dentine fromthe curvatures of inner surface of dental crown. In addition, one should be aware of possible artifacts
which could be introduced by local overheating of enamel due do high speed drilling or generation of
unwanted EPR signals if UV illumination is used for visualization of dentine inclusions [26-28]. After all,the resulting purification of the sample depends of the skills of an operator, complicating thus
standartization of sample preparation procedure.
Alternative approach to the purification of enamel is based on chemical treatment of the samples. Thisapproach was perfected and brought to the state-of-the-art level in SCRM [13]. The flow chart of thisprocedure is presented in Fig.4. Essentially this is multi-stage technique; each progressive step is used if
the previous operation failed to provide the desired quality of the sample. The quality of purificationachieved after each individual step (Fig.4) is objectively controlled by means of EPR spectroscopy - if
EPR spectrum demonstrates presence of the signals from impurities, the sample is subjected to the next
step (degree) of processing. It should be mentioned that chemical processing with alkali solution (KOH or127

Step 1.
Crushing of tooth into grains of 1-2 mm size
Treatment with NaOH under ultrasound and temperature 60oC over several days
Recording EPR spectrum

NONO

Was Step2
done?

NO

YES

Is sample pureenough?

END

YES

Was Step3
done?

NO

YES

Was Step4
done?

YES

Fig.4. Flowchart of the SCRM sample preparation procedure.
NaOH) is conducted with ultrasound and enhanced temperature (60o C) applied to a solution.
Simultaneous processing of many samples using the same ultrasonic bath as well as extremely low labor
intensity are the strong sides of this operation. The process of chemical separation may last up to several
days; alkali solution in the tubes is changed several times over duration of the treatment until no white
sediment is created anymore. As a variant, big pieces of enamel after mechanical removal of dentine may
be subjected to this treatment. In case if steps 1 and 2 (Fig.4) turn to be inefficient, heavy liquid separationof non-enamel inclusions should be applied. This process makes use of difference in specific weight ofenamel (2.9-3.05 g cm-3) and foreign inclusions. In our practice we use non-toxic water solution of sodium
polytungstate (Na6(H2W12O40).H2O), which is quite flexible in terms of variation of a specific weight. In
some (in fact, very rare) cases when all three stages of sample purification are not successful, manual
removal of inclusions could be performed under visual control.
The described procedure of sample preparation has high throughput and possesses high degree ofstandardization - both features are extremely important when bulky dose reconstruction is concerned. In
fact, low labor intensity and high throughput are achieved due to parallel processing of a large number(several dozens) of samples and multistage protocol, while higher stages of purification are applied tosome samples only when needed.
It also should be mentioned that, in the latest version of the SCRM dosimetric protocol, buccal andlingual parts of a tooth are prepared and measured separately in order to allow determination and accountof possible lifetime x-ray exposures. With low speed diamond saw the buccal and lingual planar pieces are
cut from the tooth crown (Fig.5). The following purification of enamel from these plates is performed
according to the above-described procedure. As a result, it is possible to perform dose reconstruction
separately for buccal and lingual parts of tooth and subsequently evaluate the contribution of x-ray
irradiation.
Registration of EPR spectra. This step of the EPR dosimetric protocol (see Fig.1) is performed using Xband spectrometer BRUKER ECS-106 with registration parameters which are de facto standard in EPR
128

(a)

(b)

(c)
Fig.5. Cutting of a tooth to buccal and lingual parts using low speed diamond saw.
a - original sampleb - process of cuttingc - result of cutting

dosimetry with teeth [21]. The unique feature of the SCRM protocol is a use of programmable goniometer,
which proved to be extremely efficient tool for elimination of sample anisotropy [29]. In order to secure
reproducibility of the results, spectrometric standard Mn2+:MgО is used for both calibration of g-factor
and intensity of EPR signal.
Spectra deconvolution. The spectra deconvolution (see Fig.1) is performed according to the spectrum
subtraction method in which the EPR spectrum of a non-irradiated reference sample is subtracted from thespectrum of the irradiated sample [24, 30-33]. In case of SCRM protocol, the reference sample is preparedfrom homogenized enamel material collected from teeth of several young adults [13, 30]. In addition, aspectrum of empty tube is subtracted in order to minimize the effect of low frequency noise signals andenhance thus the accuracy and reproducibility of low dose measurements. The "classical" version of
SCRM protocol [13] included manual spectra manipulation and subtraction. Recently an automatedprocedure for spectra decomposition was developed and implemented. The result of spectrum
decomposition step of the protocol (Fig.1) is the amplitude of the dosimetric signal in tooth enamel.
Evaluation of cumulative dose. The next stage of the technique is evaluation of the cumulative dose
received by the tooth (enamel). This procedure makes use of the fact that in a wide range of exposures,
intensity of the dosimetric signal linearly depends on the absorbed dose. However, the slope of calibration
curve (i.e. dependence "dosimetric signal vs. dose") and, sometimes, its shape depend on individual
properties of the particular sample. According to our experience based on analysis of several hundreds
teeth, individual variability of radiation sensitivity is about 15%. Moreover, about 5% of the samples
demonstrate non-linearity of calibration curve in the low dose range. Lack of account of the latter effect129

may lead to significant under- or overestimation of dose. Therefore, in the SCRM dosimetric protocol
individual calibration of radiation sensitivity is performed using the additive dose technique [12, 34].
Additional irradiation of the samples is performed using calibrated 137Cs source with accuracy not worse
than 3%.
In fact, application of the additive dose method has certain pros and cons comparing to the method of
universal calibration coefficient (application of single coefficient for all samples) [20, 21, 24]. The strong
sides of the additive dose method are discussed above, while its shortcomings are attributed to higher
labor intensity caused by the need for repetitive irradiation sessions and EPR spectrum recording. Anotherdisadvantage is caused by destructive nature of the additive dose method - dosimetric information in theenamel is altered after additional irradiation and the sample cannot be reevaluated in later time. In thepractice of SCRM, higher labor intensity is deliberately accepted for the sake of much higher precision ofdose reconstruction. From the point of view of destructive nature of additive dose method, a compromise
may be achieved by calibration using only small part of the available sample [35]. According to thisapproach, a small piece (several mg) of enamel is exposed to high dose (about 10 Gy) in order to assess
the slope of calibration line. Therefore, this method allows to address the problem of variation ofradiosensitivity of individual samples at the cost of moderate additional labor. At the same time, one needto keep in mind that this simplified additive dose method does not address the question of possible nonlinearity of dose response curves. In routine dose reconstruction of doses in SCRM we use universal
calibration coefficient during screening of incoming samples and then one of the discussed versions of theadditive dose technique is used for precision dose reconstruction.
If the additive dose method in concerned, quite important issues are related to the choice of irradiatorand the mode of additional irradiation: number of irradiations and dose increment.
Due to significant energy dependence of EPR response (at low energies the intensity of dosimetricsignal may be up to seven-fold to the respective signal caused by high energy exposure with the samedose), additional irradiation should be performed by the source with the energy similar to the energy of theconcerned accidental exposure. In case of Chernobyl exposure, average energy of gamma exposure wasabout 500 keV [36] and, therefore, 137Cs source (662 keV) is optimal for additional irradiation of thestudied samples. In order to provide the balance of secondary electrons, irradiation should be performed
behind the layer of a build-up material. In our practice we use 8 mm PMMA plate; special investigation
had revealed that under such conditions the balance of secondary electrons is achieved while attenuationof incident beam is still small. The irradiation protocol [37] assumes 4-6 additional irradiations withvariable increment of dose in order to obtain sufficient number of points in the region of possible nonlinearity of dose response curve. One of the options is to start irradiation with dose about the expected
accidental dose, doubling dose increment for each following irradiation.
In order to assess the uncertainty of cumulative dose evaluation, the stochastic modeling [38] is used,allowing to account the uncertainties of dosimetric signal evaluation and the accuracy of the dose ofadditional irradiation. Specialized software was developed for this purpose in SCRM [37].
Evaluation of accidental dose and its uncertainty. Once the cumulative dose is determined, the next
step (Fig.1) is expressed in evaluation of the accidental dose - a component of cumulative dose caused by
the concerned event of accidental or occupational exposure. One should remember that the cumulative
dose is also formed by the components related to the natural background exposure, medical x-ray exposureand solar UV exposure. The first component could be easily assessed knowing the age of extracted
permanent tooth (which is less than the age of the person and varies for different kinds of teeth). Twolatter components are less definitive and act as confounding factors in EPR dosimetry with teeth (seeSection 1.2). One of the most serious problems in EPR dosimetry is related to the effect of medical x-ray
exposure. Development of approaches to its account and mitigation became possible after fulfillment oflarge cycle of a research, which is briefly discussed in Section 1.2. The problem of UV exposure is130

addressed now by exclusion of the front teeth (incisors and canines) from consideration. Although thismeasure reduces the pool of available samples, lack of this consideration may result in severe distortion ofdose assessments.
Comprehensive discussion of different sources of uncertainty and approaches to their evaluation is
given elsewhere [39]. Here we will limit the discussion to a statement that, in general, overall uncertaintyof SCRM technique depends on possible contribution from x-ray diagnostics. In the case, when x-ray
component of dose is not present in the tooth, uncertainty (2σ) is ca.30-40 mGy. In the case when x-ray
component is present, uncertainty could be as high as 60-80 mGy.
1.2. Study of confounding factors
A good deal of research was devoted to the study of confounding factors and development ofapproaches to their account and mitigation. Limited volume of this paper does not allow us to present
these results in depth. We just mention that among those studies were investigations of the effect of
crushing enamel and grain sizes [17], UV exposure [18] and, in particular, medical x-ray exposure [19, 40].
The last included a large cycle of both theoretical and experimental studies. Among others we did Monte
Carlo simulations of depth dose profiles for idealized enamel slabs, whole isolated teeth [40] and teeth
placed in the head of mathematical phantom. Experimental research was concentrated on reproduction ofgeometries and conditions of exposures, which were modeled mathematically. In addition various types of
x-ray examination (both dental and thorax) were simulated using ALDERSON type heterogenic
antropomorphic phantom (Fig.6). It was demonstrated that x-ray examination of a torso has negligible
contribution to the dose to teeth (not more than 0.2 mGy), while dental x-ray examination may lead tohigh doses (up to 70 mGy) in enamel. It was shown that doses to teeth strongly depend on the type of
examination (local vs. panoramic) and the hardware used for this examination. At the same time, in allcases pronounced depth profiles were observed in the studied teeth. These observations suggested

x-raysx-rays(a)(b)

Fig.6. Geometry of simulation of local dental x-ray examination:a - exterior view of the ALDERSON type phantom headb - section of phantom at jaw level with whole teeth placed in 6-8 positions.

131rejection of our original approach to account of x-ray dose (assessed as a product of number of
examinations and dose per examination) and transfer to the approach based on separate analysis of buccal
and lingual parts of a tooth and observation of dose gradient. The modern version of the SCRM EPR
protocol requires the use of such separate analysis of two parts of a tooth in order to evaluate medical xray dose based on the results of this analysis.
1.3. Quality assurance program
Since EPR dosimetry is a relatively new method, which is still in the phase of establishment,
particular attention needs to be paid to quality assurance of the results and check of reliability of themethod. In order to ensure high quality of the results obtained in SCRM, an elaborate quality assurance
program was developed and implemented. Besides regular internal tests and verification of calibrator
source (the calibrator is traceable to IAEA laboratory of secondary standard in Siebersdorf), SCRM took
part in a series of bilateral and multilateral intercomparisons. It is generally accepted that intercomparisonis the most efficient mechanism for straightforward evaluation of quality of a radiation measurement
method.
From the point of view of its design, all intercomparisons fall into three groups:• intercalibration on the average samples of tooth enamel with uniform properties; 1st International
Intercomparison [20] including 9 laboratories from 6 countries was performed according to this plan;• intercomparison using whole teeth exposed in vitro; the 2nd International Intercomparison [21] with 20
participants and two bilateral intercomparisons were performed in this way [41];• intercomparison using whole teeth exposed in vivo; one bilateral test was performed with Center ofApplied Dosimetry of Utah University (USA), in which the actual teeth from liquidators were used [42].
All intercomparisons were performed as blind tests, e.g. nominal dose values were not known to theparticipants.
Fig.7 depicts the results of SCRM lab, which were demonstrated in the most recent intercomparison(bilateral test using whole teeth irradiated in vitro). One may see that in the whole range of doses, SCRM
EPR dosimetry protocol [13] performs very well, providing accurate dose estimates. Average deviationfrom nominal doses was about 30 mGy, relative deviation - less than 14%.

S C R M dose, m G y

y = 1.013x + 23.552
2
R = 0.9982

N om inal dose, m G y
Fig.7. SCRM results in the most recent international intercalibration of EPR dosimetry withteeth (bilateral intecomparison with CAD).
132

Fig.8. Geography of tooth acquisition in Poltava oblast of Ukraine.
2. Application of EPR dosimetry in Ukraine
2.1 Acquisition of teeth in the national scale
As mentioned in Section 1.1 of this paper, the nationwide tooth acquisition network was establishedin Ukraine. In 1997 a joint order of the Ministry of Health and Academy of Medical Sciences came toeffect, establishing the legal basis for collection of teeth from Chernobyl clean-up workers, which residein 5 oblasts of Ukraine. In 2001 two more oblasts were incorporated into this network. The central
bioprobe bank was established in SCRM AMS Ukraine with the function of accumulation and long term
storage of the collected samples. The modern structure of the tooth acquisition network is shown at Fig.2.
This network has hubs in each of the concerned oblasts, as a rule a principal dentist (officer of the
Ministry of Health) is assigned to be a person responsible for operation of the regional branch of the
network. As a rule, each regional hub receives collected teeth from a number of dental clinics spread over
the oblast. Collection of teeth from liquidators is organized in the specialized hospitals or dental clinics,
which provide medical service to Chernobyl clean-up workers. As an example, the geographical structureof tooth acquisition in Poltava oblast is presented in Fig.8.
Most general characteristics of the tooth acquisition network as well as the results of its operation arepresented in Table 2. It may be seen from this table that the effectiveness of this work in different oblasts
is not uniform. The best results were achieved in Kiev oblast, in which the pilot stage of this effort had
began in 1992, and in Poltava oblast. The last case is worth separate discussion. In 2000 in the framework
Table 2. Characteristics of infrastructure for collection of teeth from liquidators.
Number of dental clinics
Number of teeth
Year of
Number of
Oblast of Ukraine
involved in collection ofcollected ininitiation
dentiststeeth
1998-2001
Dnipropetrivsk
1998
30
40
152
Zaporijja
1998
12
18
75
Kyiv
1992
5
11
2096
Poltava
1998
57
94
1360
Kharkiv
1998
5
12
247
Cherkasy
2001
5
8
27
Chernyhiv
2001
2
5
24
TOTAL:
116
188
3981
133

900
800

C hernyhiv

N um ber ofteeth

700

C herkasy
600
500

Poltava

400

Zaporija

300

D nipropetrovsk

200

Kharkiv
100

Kiev

0

1998

1999
2000
Y ear ofoperation

2001

Fig.9. Collection of teeth in 7 oblasts of Ukraine.
of German-French Initiative "Chernobyl", one of the oblasts was selected for establishing "good practice"called to demonstrate the effectiveness of the tooth collection system under condition of appropriate
supply. In this oblast (Poltava) the monetary incentive was provided at a sufficient level, suggesting fixed
fee to the coordinator and "per sample" payment to dental practitioners and their assistants. This approachproved to be extremely efficient leading to significant expansion of the collection network (see Table 2
and Fig.8) as well to the increase of the number of collected samples (Fig.9). So the number ofparticipating dentists increased from 11 in 1998 to 94 in 2001, annual influx of collected teeth grew morethan twofold. In 2001 the logistics tested in Poltava oblast was applied in other regions covered by the
tooth acquisition network.
Tooth collection is performed in the following manner. When the tooth is extracted by a dentist, thespecial form (see Section 1.1 for details) is filled out and the tooth is washed and placed into a paper
envelope stapled to the form. Samples collected in local hospitals are forwarded to the regional hub andbatches of teeth are periodically sent to Kiev to the central bioprobe bank. Upon arrival to Kiev, allsamples are subjected to input control called to evaluate the state of a tooth and assign respective rank (seeTable.1). Then all teeth are logged into the bioprobe bank and the information from the tooth ID form isentered into the database. Periodically (at least once per quarter) a detailed review of the quality ofcollected samples is prepared and sent to the oblast coordinator, providing thus a feedback to the regional
level of the tooth acquisition network. Totally over the period of operation of the acquisition network(1992-2001) 3981 teeth were collected (see Table 2), and this number is increasing daily. In general, thepool of collected samples establishes a good basis for both routine dose reconstruction and, more
important, for randomized selection of subjects for all kinds of validation tests (see Section 2.3 of thispaper).
2.2. Reconstruction of individual doses
First time EPR dosimetry was used for reconstruction of individual doses Ukrainian liquidators in
1993. Since 1995, when the methodological guidelines [43] were adopted by the Ministry of Health, EPR
dosimetry is being performed regularly. Till the end of 2001 465 individual doses were reconstructed,
mostly using the whole scale SCRM protocol including individual calibration by the additive dosetechnique. However, all this time, our methodological research continues, finding its reflection in
upgrades of the dose evaluation protocol. So, till 1999 doses were reconstructed using the whole teeth and
134

120

Frequency

100
80
60
40
20
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

D ose,m Sv

Fig.10. Distribution of individual doses of liquidators 1986-1987 assessed by EPR dosimetry withteeth.
the contribution of x-ray doses was assessed basing on the data from the tooth ID forms regarding thenumber of x-ray procedures and the empirical data on average doses per one examination. However, in thecourse of tests and comparisons we found that information from the ID forms is very unreliable and,
therefore, the formerly used method of x-ray dose account is endowed with unacceptably high uncertainty.
As a result, since mid 1999 we have switched to the more elaborate protocol comprising separate dose
evaluation using lingual and buccal parts of teeth. All contemporary EPR analyses are performed using
this approach, which allows to detect and quantify the possible contribution of dental x-ray exposure.
Appearance of another confounding factor - UV exposure, which was first reported in 1996 [44],prompted the revision of all previously obtained results and withdrawal of dose estimates obtained withfront teeth. Although a comprehensive study [18] of the effect of UV exposure suggested a clue tomitigation and evaluation of this effect, currently we do not use front teeth for EPR dosimetry.
Fig.10 presents the frequency distribution of individual doses of Chernobyl clean-up workers
assessed by EPR. One may see that this distribution confirms the point that very high doses of liquidators
were rather exception than a rule, and a mean dose of liquidators of 1986-1987 is 110 mSv.
It should be stressed that a wide scale application of high precision measurement protocol withindividual calibration of each sample is a unique experience. In other cases a full scale EPR protocol wasused for reconstruction up to several dozens of persons [4, 45], ans a wide scale EPR dosimetry [46] wasapplied using certainly less accurate technique based on the use of a single calibration coefficient. In fact,
application of the elaborate protocol for reconstruction of several hundreds of individual doses in Ukraine
allowed not only to conduct accurate dosimetry, but also to bring some qualitatively new results. So, theeffect of non-linearity of dose response curves was discovered; as discussed above, this phenomenon may
have significant effect on the accuracy of dose reconstruction using EPR dosimetry with teeth. In addition,
application of the additive dose technique to all studied teeth allowed comparison of radiosensitivity ofdifferent types of teeth. It was shown (Fig.11) that radiosensitivity does not depend on type and location ofa tooth. Another important result is presented in Fig.12 reflecting degree of inter-sample variation ofindividual radiosensitivity. It was shown that relative variation of calibration coefficient (1σ) is about 12%.
Remarkably, these results provide quantitative measure of additional uncertainty, which is introduced into
EPR dosimetry if a method of universal calibration coefficient is used for dose assessment. This estimate(12% additional error) is applicable for all types of teeth used for dose reconstruction (Fig.11).
The results of routine EPR dosimetry are used in Ukraine in the framework of several medical
135

Radiosensitivity, normalised
units

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Position (number) of toothFig.11. Radiosensitivity of different types of teeth.
Teeth nos.1-2 - incisors, 3 -canines, 4-5 premolars, 6-7 - molars, 8 - wisdom teeth.

35

Relative frequency, %

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Radiosensitivity, normalised units

Fig.12. Distribution of individual radiosensitivity of human teeth (Ukrainian population)
studies as high precision assessments of individual doses received by liquidators. However, high cost andlabor intensity of EPR dosimetry, as well as limited availability of samples, prevent this technique frombeing a routine dose assessment method for dosimetric support of a large-scale biomedical follow-up.
2.3. EPR dosimetry as a reference method for validation of other dose estimates
This unique application of EPR dosimetry was proposed and is effectively used in Ukraine. The
matter is that prior to its application, any method of retrospective dosimetry needs to be validated bymeans of independent, presumably superior accuracy, "gold standard" method. From the discussion above,
one may conclude that EPR dosimetry possesses unique qualities (high precision, possibility of dosereconstruction long time after exposure), which makes it an inevitable tool for calibration and validation ofother methods of dosimetry. In terms of accuracy, internal consistency and overall quality, EPR dosimetry
with teeth may be considered as a source of dose estimates of a reference quality. In fact, EPR dosimetryis the only retrospective dosimetry protocol, which comprises perfectly traceable elements; uncertainty of136

each of them may be evaluated in rather straightforward manner. Overall performance of EPR dosimetry
with teeth had been proven in the course of several blind intercomparisons (see discussion above - Section
1.3).
Therefore, on the basis of the described above results, a concept of utility of EPR dosimetry as areference method for validation of the potent methods of retrospective dosimetry, was developed.
According to this approach, the method under consideration is applied to the representative sample ofsubjects who have high quality (in particular, no x-ray dose) EPR dose estimates. Upon comparison of
results provided by the method of concern with the "gold standard" EPR doses, the conclusion regarding
the accuracy and general applicability of the given method can be derived. Not touching statistical aspectsof the validation studies, here we should concentrate on the aspects related to application of EPR
dosimetry.
Obviously, application of EPR as a reference method sets certain requirements for selection ofsubjects and quality of tooth samples. It should be stressed that selection of subjects for the validation testis one of the most demanding and responsible elements of such application. In general, subjects of thevalidation test should meet the following criteria:• A tooth must be good for EPR dosimetry, i.e. it should be molar or premolar, have sufficient amount ofenamel.
• Enamel must be distributed among buccal and lingual parts of a tooth, allowing thus separate analysisof these parts and evaluation of x-ray exposure.
• Indication on absence of medical x-ray examinations (e.g. from the tooth ID form).
• Availability of auxiliary dosimetric information, e.g. official dose record.
• Affiliation of a subject to the studied group (category).
• Adherence of a subject to given dose interval.
• Residence of a subject in a respective territory (for instance, the area included into certain study).
• Availability of actual postal address.
• Availability of a telephone number.
• Agreement to participate in a study (test).
• Possibility to establish personal contact with the subject (home visit or invitation for examination).
One may see that some of the requirements are difficult to meet and, moreover, sometimes they arecontradictory. Certainly, depending of particular plan of the validation test, the rigidity of the above-listed
criteria may vary to some extent. In general, however, the enlistment of subjects into the study group is adifficult task. There is very limited flexibility at the level of EPR dosimetry. Effectively this means thatapplication of all criteria leads to reduction of the number of appropriate subjects. The only way to deal
with depletion of the original sample is to prepare an abundant number of candidates in order to keep adesired sample size even after washing out some subjects. Since collection of teeth is very slow andinertial process, the solution lays in collection of all available teeth, their storage and selection of subjects
following the criteria set by a particular study. This approach (large-scale acquisition of teeth and theirretrieval from the central bioprobe bank) was implemented in Ukraine. Success of several validation
studies, which involved EPR dosimetry as a reference method, unequivocally proved adequacy of thisapproach.
As an example of this application of EPR dosimetry, we will take the testing of classical ADR(Analytical Dose Reconstruction). This method (ADR) makes use of the information about the motions
and durations during the work of liquidators at Chernobyl NPP site as well as dose rate data forassessment of their radiation doses. . The plan of the test, which was performed in 1998 in the frameworkof the pilot phase of Ukraine-US leukemia study, included independent evaluation of doses to 20
liquidators by ADR [47] and EPR. The following selection criteria were applied:137

1. Availability of a tooth good for EPR dosimetry (no requirement regarding separate analysis of
buccal and lingual parts was set at that time).
2. No more than one dental x-ray examination according the tooth ID form data.
3. Affiliation of liquidators to one of the categories for which ADR was applicable (Chernobyl
NPP staff).
Totally 30 candidates were selected for this study, 20 of them were interviewed according to ADR
procedure and enlisted into the study. ADR was performed by the expert-dosimetrists which routinely
perform this work. Comparison of two independent dose estimates revealed quite a significant discrepancy,
ADR results had a tendency to overestimation of doses. In depth analysis of ADR analysis, in particularseparate consideration of isolated components of dose (note that EPR is able to assess a total dose of
lifetime occupational and accidental exposure) allowed to identify the source of discrepancy. Fig.13
presents the comparison of EPR dose and a total dose assessed using ADR. For the latter, breakdown toseparate components is given. Finally, it was determined that inadequately high dose estimates wereassigned to the episodes of transportation across heavily contaminated territories around the NPP site. In
addition, contrary to the ADR protocol, practitioners did not apply respective correction factor to the final
result, i.e. the products of wrongly applied ADR were almost two times higher than the results of a
canonic ADR procedure. These observations allowed us to fix the weak points of ADR and resulted indevelopment of a substantially revised version of this analytical technique (RADRUE). From the point ofview of EPR application, abbreviated account of lifetime x-ray exposure was justified by high levels of
exposure of this group of liquidators and, respectively, lower contribution of x-ray exposure to a total dose.
Besides to the discussed test, this approach had been successfully implemented for testing various
methods of retrospective dosimetry. Among the tested methods were FISH, SEAD (Soft Expert
Assessment Dosimetry - a novel method, which makes use of typical dose distributions of particulargroups of liquidators) [48] and, finally RADRUE (ADR derivative, aimed to provide most universal dose
estimates to the subjects of the post-Chernobyl epidemiological study).
In general, results of such application of EPR proved to be very informative. For example, based onthese validation exercises, SEAD was rejected, classical ADR revealed its weak points and suggested
ways of its revision and improvement. Finally, the mentioned above RADRUE method was approved for
2
1.8
EPR

1.6

Dose on route

1.4

Outside Pripjat

Dose, Gy

1.2

Pripjat1

On-site activities

0.8

TLD monitoring

0.6
0.4
0.2
0

Subject

Fig.13. Results of ADR test. EPR doses vs. cumulative dose assessments with breakdown tocomponents.
138

use in the framework of Ukraine-USA case-control leukemia study on the basis of the results ofverification by EPR.
Conclusions
EPR dosimetry with teeth in Ukraine over the last decade went all way from first laboratory tests to alarge scale routine application. A large cycle of methodological research was conducted in order todevelop an original version of the EPR dosimetric protocol as well as investigate the effects caused by
confounding factors and develop approaches to their account and mitigation. In the development of the
EPR dosimetric protocol, the main attention was concentrated on achievement of high accuracy andreproducibility, low sensitivity threshold as well as high throughput. Elaborate quality assurance program,including a series of international intercomparisons had demonstrated high precision and sensitivity of the
SCRM version of the EPR protocol. Creation and continuous operation of the nationwide tooth acquisition
network is another key to the success of EPR dosimetry in Ukraine.
The main applications of EPR dosimetry in Ukraine are both routine high precision reconstruction ofdoses to Chernobyl clean-up workers and the use of EPR dose estimates as a reference dose for validationof other retrospective dosimetry techniques. The latter proved to be the most efficient application of EPR
dosimetry in the post-Chernobyl situation. EPR dosimetry was used for testing such methods ofretrospective dosimetry as FISH, ARD, SEAD and RADRUE. In general, EPR dosimetry plays inevitablerole in dosimetric support of post-Chernobyl medical follow-up studies.
Reference
1.

Pass B., Wood R.E., Liu F.F. et al. High radiation doses from radiotherapy measured by electron spin resonancein dental enamel. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 76, 237-247 (1998).
2. Romanyukha A.A., Regulla D., Vasilenko E.K. et al. Verification of occupational doses at the first nuclear
power plant in the Former Soviet Union. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 47, 1277-1280 (1996).
3. Nakajima T. Estimation of absorbed dose to evacuees at Pripjat-city using ESR measurements of sugar andexposure rate calculations. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 45(1), 113-120 (1994).
4. Romanyukha A.A., Degteva M. O., Kozheurov V. P. et al. Pilot study of the Urals population by tooth electron
paramagnetic resonance dosimetry. Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 35, 305-310 (1996).
5. Schauer D.A., Desrosiers M.F., Kuppusamy P. et al. Radiation dosimetry of an accidental overexposure using
EPR spectrometry and imaging of human bone. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 47, 1345-1350 (1996).
6. Regulla D.F., Deffner U. Dose estimation by ESR spectroscopy at a fatal radiation accident. Appl. Radiat. Isot.
40, 1039-1043 (1989).
7. Lloyd D.C., Edwards A.A., Fitzsimons E.J. et al. Death of a classified worker probably caused by overexposure
to radiation. Occup. Environ. Med. 51, 713-718 (1994).
8. Haskell E.H., Hayes R.B., Kenner G.H. et al. Electron paramagnetic resonance techniques and spacebiodosimetry. Radiat. Res. 148, S51-S59 (1997).
9. Desrosiers M.F., Romanyukha A.A. Technical aspects of the electron paramagnetic resonance method for tooth
enamel dosimetry. Biomarkers: Medical and Workplace Applications. Mendelsohn M.L., Mohr L.C., Peters J.P.,
Eds. - Washington, DC, Joseph Henry Press, 53-64 (1998).
10. Pass B. Collective radiation biodosimetry for dose reconstruction of acute accidental exposures: a review.
Environmental Health Perspect. 105 (6), 1397-1402 (1997).
11. Romanyukha A.A., Regulla D. Aspects of Retrospective dosimetry. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 47, 1293-1297 (1996).
12. Ikeya M. New application of electron spin resonance. World Scientific, Singapore (1993).
13. Chumak V., Sholom S., Pasalskaya L. Application of high precision EPR dosimetry with teeth for reconstructionof doses to Chernobyl populations. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 84 (1-4), 515-520 (1999).
14. Wieser A., Onori S., Fattibene P. et al. Comparison of sample preparation and signal evaluation methods for
EPR analysis of tooth enamel. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 52 (5), 1059-1064 (2000).
15. Haskell E., Kenner G., Hayes R. et al. EPR dosimetry of teeth in past and future accidents: a prospective look at
a retrospective method. Proceedings of the second Hiroshima Int. Symposium “Effects of low-level radiation for139

residents near Semipalatinsk nuclear test site”. - Hiroshima 261-273 (1996).
16. Sholom S.V., Haskell E.H., Hayes R.B. et al. EPR-dosimetry with carious teeth. Radiat. Meas. 32, 799-803(2000).
17. Sholom S.V., Haskell E.H., Hayes R.B. et al. Influence of crushing and additive irradiation procedures on EPR
dosimetry of tooth enamel. Radiat. Meas. 29 (1), 105-111 (1998).
18. Sholom S. V., Haskell E. H., Hayes R. B. et al. Properties of light induced EPR signals in enamel and their
possible interference with gamma-induced signals. Radiat. Meas. 29 (1), 113-118 (1998).
19. Sholom S. V., Chumak V. V., Pasalskaja L.F. Some aspects of EPR dosimetry of liquidators. Appl. Radiat. Isot.
52, 1283-1286 (2000).
20. Chumak V., Bailiff I., Baran N. et al. The first international intercomparison of EPR-dosimetry with teeth: first
results. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 47 (11-12), 1281-1292 (1996).
21. Wieser A., Mehta K., Amira S. et al. The second international intercomparison on EPR tooth dosimetry. Radiat.
Meas. 32, 549-557 (2000).
22. Ishii H., Ikeya M., Okano M. ESR dosimetry of teeth of residents close to Chernobyl reactor accident. J. Nucl.
Sci. and Technology. 27 (12), 1153-1155 (1990).
23. Onori, S., Pantaloni, M., Baccaro, S. And Fuochi, P.G. Influencing factors on ESR bone dosimetry. Appl. Radiat.
Isot. 47, 1637-1640 (1996).
24. Skvortsov V.G., Ivannikov A.I., Eichhoff U. Assessment of individual accumulated irradiation doses using EPR
spectroscopy of tooth enamel. J. Mol. Struct. 347, 321-330 (1995).
25. Brilliant M., Clevezal G, Mordvintsev P. et al. Determination of accumulated dose of gamma- exposure by tooth
enamel. Hematology and Transfusiology 12, 11-16 (1990) (in Russian).
26. Scherbina O.I., Brik A.B. Temperature stability of carbonate groups in tooth enamel. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 52,
1071-1075 (2000).
27. Desrosiers M.F., Simic M.G., Eichmiller F.G.et al. Mechanically-induced Generation of radicals in tooth
enamel. Appl. Radiat.Isot. 40 (10-12), 1195-1197 (1989).
28. Onori S., Aragno D., Fattibene P. et al. ISS protocol for EPR tooth dosimetry. Radiat. Meas. 32, 787-792 (2000).
29. Haskell E.H., Hayes R. B., Kenner G. H. Improved accuracy of EPR dosimetry using a constant rotation
goniometer. Radiat. Meas. 27, 325-329 (1997).
30. Chumak, V., Likhtarev I., Sholom S., Meckbach Rr., Krjuchkov V. Chernobyl experience in field ofretrospective dosimetry: reconstruction of doses to the population and liquidators involved in the accident,
Radiat. Prot. Dos. 77, 91-95 (1998).
31. 53. Haskell, E.H., Hayes, R.B., Kenner, G.H., Wieser, A., Aragno, D., Fattibene, P., Onori, S. Achievable
precision and accuracy in EPR dosimetry of tooth enamel. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 84. 527-535 (1999).
32. 55. Gualtieri, G., Colacicchi, S., Sgattoni, R., Giannoni, M. The Chernobyl accident: EPR dosimetry on dental
enamel of children. Appl. Radiat. Isot., 55, 71-79 (2001).
33. 103. Shimano T., Iwasaki M., Miyazawa C., Miki T., Kai A., Ikeya M. Human tooth dosimetry for gamma-rays
and dental x-rays using ESR. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 40, 1035-1038 (1989).
34. Aitken M. J. Thermoluminescence dating. Academic Press, London (1985).
35. Hayes R.B., Haskell E.H., Kenner G.H. et al. A virtually nondestructive EPR technique accounting for
diagnostic X-rays. Radiat. Meas. 32, 559-566 (2000).
36. Radiological consequence of the Chernobyl accident. Kryshev I., Ed. Nuclear Society International, Moscow(1992).
37. Chumak V., Pavlenko Ju., Sholom S. An approach to the assessment of overall uncertainty of determination ofdose using an ESR technique. Appl. Radiat. Isot., 47 (11/12), 1287-1291 (1996).
38. Rose K., Smith E., Gardner R. et al. Parameter sensitivities, Monte Carlo filtering and model forecasting under
uncertainty. J. of Forecasting, 10, 117-133 (1991).
39. Sholom, S.V., Chumak, V. Methodological aspects of EPR dosimetry with teeth. Proc. Of the meeting ofAustrian radiation protection society: Radiation protection for people and society in tomorrows Europe, Sept.1721, Gmunden, 2001., P.78-82 (2001).
40. Sholom, S.V., Chumak, V., Pavlenko, J. The doses from diagnostic x-ray procedures in the EPR spectroscopy
technique with tooth enamel. Proc. of the IPRA Regional Symp. On Radiation Protection in Neighboring
Countries of Central Europe, Sept.8-12, Prague, 571-574 (1997).

140

41. Haskell E., Kenner G., Hayes R. et al. An EPR intercomparison using teeth irradiated prior to crushing. Radiat.
Meas., 27 (2), 419-424 (1997).
42. Chumak, V., Likhtarev, I., Sholom, S., Pasalskaya, L. Pavlenko, Y. Retrospective reconstruction of radiation
doses of Chernobyl liquidators by electron paramagnetic resonance. Armed Forces Radiobiology ResearchInstitute, Bethesda, MD, USA (1997).
43. Assessment of external exposure dose for individuals exposed due to Chernobyl and other radiation accidents
with EPR spectroscopy of tooth enamel. Temporary guidelines. Ministry of Health of Ukraine, Kiev (1995).
44. Liidja G., Past J., Puskar J. et al. Paramagnetic resonance in tooth enamel created by ultraviolet light. Appl.
Radiat. Isot. 47 (8), 785-788 (1996).
45. Nakamura N., Miyazawa C., Sawada S. et al. A close correlation between electron spin resonance (ESR)
dosimetry from tooth enamel and cytogenetic dosimetry from lymphocytes of Hiroshima atomic-bomb
survivors. Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 73 (6), 619-627 (1998).
46. Ivannikov A.I., Skvortzov V. G., Stepanenko V. F. et al. Wide-scale EPR retrospective dosimetry: results andproblems. Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 71 (3), 175-180 (1997).
47. Nossovsky A., Ed. Retrospective dosimetry of participants of clean-up after Chornobyl accident (1996) Seda-stil,Kiev (in Russian).
48. Krjuchkov V.P., Chumak V.V., Kosterev V.V. The Problem of Dose Reconstruction for Liquidators of ChNPP
Accident and the Possibility of it's Decision by Fuzzy Sets Method. Proc. 1998 ANS Radiation Protection andShielding Division Topical Conf. "Technologies for the New Century". Vol.1., Nashville (USA), 562-567(1998).

141