ABSTRACT
@#<b>Objective</b> To discuss the selection of dose estimation methods for internal exposure to tritium, their applicable working scenarios, and accurate dose estimation. <b>Methods</b> We compared the process and formula of two methods of urine tritium concentration monitoring in estimating the committed effective dose, explained the limitations of the atmospheric tritium concentration monitoring method, and compared the three methods from the aspects of the application scope and measurement methods. <b>Results</b> The atmospheric tritium concentration monitoring and urine tritium concentration monitoring methods provided opposite results of the magnitude of the committed effective doses for persons 3 and 10. The mean of the absolute values of the percentages by which <i>E</i>(<i>τ</i>)<sub>1 </sub>values were higher than <i>E</i>(<i>τ</i>)<sub>3 </sub>values was 29.6%, and that of <i>E</i>(<i>τ</i>)<sub>2</sub> higher than <i>E</i>(<i>τ</i>)<sub>3 </sub>was 72.4%. The consistency between the reference man-based tritium dose estimation method and the atmospheric tritium concentration monitoring method was better. The atmospheric tritium concentration monitoring method tended to underestimate the committed effective dose of tritium. <b>Conclusion</b> We suggest urine tritium concentration monitoring for estimating the committed effective dose, rather than atmospheric tritium concentration monitoring. The use of the reference man-based tritium dose estimation method or urine tritium activity concentration integration method should be based on individual metabolic conditions, working environment, and intake time, and urine sampling should be on time and repeated for monitoring..