Abstract No:
1646
Abstract Type:
Student Poster
Authors:
A Sumner1, J Slagley2
Institutions:
1USMC, Dayton, OH, 2Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT/ENV), Wright-Patterson AFB, OH
Presenter:
Andrew Sumner
USMC
Faculty Advisor:
Dr. Jeremy Slagley, CIH, CSP
Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT/ENV)
Description:
Medical and decontamination response options to radiological contamination in extreme cold environments are constrained by the impracticality of water-based decontamination. This study evaluates dry, air-based decontamination methods for litter-bound patients, focusing on reducing airborne exposure during patient disrobing. Findings provide practical guidance for protecting medical responders during arctic and austere operations
Situation/Problem:
Water-based decontamination is the standard for radiological exposure but is often infeasible in arctic environments due to freezing temperatures, logistical burden, and patient safety concerns. Litter-bound casualties cannot self-decontaminate, and disrobing during treatment can re-aerosolize contaminants, increasing secondary exposure risk to medical personnel. Limited empirical data exist evaluating dry decontamination methods for mitigating airborne exposure during this critical phase of care.
Methods:
A controlled laboratory study was conducted using the Multi-Use Research for Particulate Hazards and Environmental Exposures (MURPHEE) chamber. A full-sized mannequin dressed in U.S. military extreme cold weather clothing was secured on a medical litter and contaminated with 27.0 g of copper oxide (CuO), a radiological surrogate selected for its representative particle size distribution (≤44 μm) and density (6.31 g/cm³). Three treatment conditions were evaluated: no decontamination (control), HEPA vacuum decontamination, and commercial air shower decontamination. Each condition was tested in 10 trials (n = 30), with randomized trial order to reduce systematic bias.
The HEPA vacuum system delivered approximately 155 CFM through a wide nozzle using a standardized, sectioned cleaning pattern. The air shower delivered average surface velocities of approximately 14 m/s over a two-minute cleaning cycle. Following decontamination, the mannequin was disrobed to simulate medical treatment. Airborne particles were measured using two calibrated optical particle counters positioned to represent responder breathing zones. Particle counts were converted to mass concentration (mg/m³) to estimate one-minute exposure risk. Statistical analysis included ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, variance testing, fit model analysis and Tukey HSD (α = 0.05). Strengths include controlled conditions and repeated trials; limitations include mannequin use and laboratory airflow constraints
Results / Conclusions:
Results: HEPA vacuum decontamination resulted in an 86% reduction in airborne contaminant concentration during disrobing compared to no decontamination (p < 0.0001). The air shower method showed no statistically significant improvement over the control (p = 0.36).
Conclusions: HEPA vacuum decontamination significantly reduces secondary airborne exposure risk during litter-bound patient disrobing in cold environments. Air-based blow-off without effective particle capture did not provide meaningful protection. These findings support vacuum-based dry decontamination as a practical alternative when water-based methods are not feasible, with implications for military and emergency medical operations in arctic and austere settings.
Core Competencies:
Radiation (Ionizing and Nonionizing)
Secondary Core Competencies:
Radiation (Ionizing and Nonionizing)
Risk Management
Choose at least one (1), and up to five, (5) keywords from the following list. These selections will optimize your presentation's search results for attendees.
Aerosol and airborne particulate monitoring
Emergency preparedness and response
Radiation protection and monitoring
Risk assessment and management
Based on the information that will be presented during your proposed session, please indicate the targeted audience practice level: (select one)
Technician: Technician is a job title given to persons who are trained to assist professionals and practitioners with task-specific assignments. Technicians may collect air samples, operate direct-reading instruments, and provide other services based on specific training received and instructions received from professionals and practitioners.
Was this session organized by an AIHA Technical Committee, Special Interest Group, Working Group, Advisory Group or other AIHA project Team?
No
Are worker exposure data and/or results of worker exposure data analysis presented?
No
How will this help advance the science of IH/OH?
Through added evaluation and testing of alternate decontamination methods, applicable both to the military and civilian sectors
Have you presented this information before?
No
I have read and agree to these guidelines.
Yes