Subjective Symptoms in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Personnel: A Multi-Center Study in Italy.

Introduction: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) personnel have significant exposure to static and low-frequency time-varying magnetic fields. In these workers an increased prevalence of different subjective symptoms has been observed. The aim of our study was to investigate the prevalence of non-specific subjective symptoms and of "core symptoms" in a group of MRI personnel working in different centers in Italy, and of possible relationships with personal and occupational characteristics. Methods: The occurrence of 11 subjective symptoms was evaluated using a specific questionnaire with 240 subjects working in 6 different Italian hospitals and research centers, 177 MRI health care and research personnel and 63 unexposed subjects employed in the same departments. Exposure was subjectively investigated according to the type of MRI scanner (≤1.5 vs. ≥3 T) and to the number of MRI procedures attended and/or performed by the personnel, even if no information on how frequently the personnel entered the scanner room was collected. The possible associations among symptoms and estimated EMF exposure, the main characteristics of the population, and job stress perception were analyzed. Results: Eighty-six percent of the personnel reported at least one symptom; drowsiness, headache, and sleep disorders were the most frequent. The total number of symptoms did not differ between exposed persons and controls. Considering the total number of annual MRI procedures reported by the personnel, no significant associations were found nor with the total number of symptoms, nor with "core symptoms." Only subjects complaining of drowsiness also reported a significantly higher mean annual number of MRI procedures with ≤ 1.5 T scanners when compared with exposed subjects without drowsiness. In a multivariate model, subjects with a high level of perceived stress complained of more symptoms (p = 0.0002). Conclusions: Our study did not show any association between the occurrence of reversible subjective symptoms, including the more specific "core symptoms," and the occupational exposure of MRI personnel to static and low-frequency time-varying magnetic fields. On the other hand, the role played by occupational stress appears to be not negligible. In further research in this field, measurements of EMF exposure should be considered.

[Judgment of fitness for work in employees with a history of malignant neoplastic disease and exposed to ionizing radiations: evaluation criteria and their application in a case-series study]. / Il giudizio di idoneità al rischio da esposizione a radiazioni ionizzanti nei lavoratori con pregressa patologia neoplastica: criteri di valutazione e analisi di una casistica.

INTRODUCTION: The increase in working age has many epidemiological consequences, one of which is an increased incidence of neoplastic diseases among the working population. Therefore it is more frequent than in the past that the Approved Physician ("Autorizzato" according to Italian legislation) have to judge working fitness in employees suffering from cancer and at the same time exposed to ionizing sources. AIMS: In this study we give suggestions for the decision if a worker, who have previously suffered from malignant tumors, is ready to go or not to go back to work. METHODS: Though we believe in the preventive theory of the linear correlation without threshold for stochastic effects ("Linear No Threshold" LNT), we considered data from the literature that highlight how very low doses of radiation exposure do not increase the risk of stochastic effects and how the potential occupational exposure to low doses does not introduce a significant additional risk of cancer in subjects with a history of malignant tumor. RESULTS: We identify "objective" elements of judgment related to the neoplastic disease of the worker and his activity, but we emphasize the importance of the psychological condition of the worker, as well as his professional interest and his career opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria we recommend were applied to a group of workers suffering from cancer and with different working activities at risk of exposure to ionizing radiations. The evaluation process is a first rational approach to the assessment of their suitability in worker suffering from neoplastic disease, with the need for custom handling for each individual.