A Simple Survey of the Preparation Situation for Resident's Evacuation in Japanese Prefectures After the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident

437 nuclear power plants are in operation at present around the world to meet increasing energy demands. Unfortunately, five major nuclear accidents have occurred in the past--ie, at Kyshtym (Russia [then USSR], 1957), Windscale Piles (UK, 1957), Three Mile Island (USA, 1979), Chernobyl (Ukraine [then USSR], 1986), and Fukushima (Japan, 2011). The effects of these accidents on individuals and societies are diverse and enduring. Accumulated evidence about radiation health effects on atomic bomb survivors and other radiation-exposed people has formed the basis for national and international regulations about radiation protection. However, past experiences suggest that common issues were not necessarily physical health problems directly attributable to radiation exposure, but rather psychological and social effects. Additionally, evacuation and long-term displacement created severe health-care problems for the most vulnerable people, such as hospital inpatients and elderly people.

Past nuclear disasters, such as the atomic bombings in 1945 and major accidents at nuclear power plants, have highlighted similarities in potential public health effects of radiation in both circumstances, including health issues unrelated to radiation exposure. Although the rarity of nuclear disasters limits opportunities to undertake rigorous research of evidence-based interventions and strategies, identification of lessons learned and development of an effective plan to protect the public, minimise negative effects, and protect emergency workers from exposure to high-dose radiation is important. Additionally, research is needed to help decision makers to avoid premature deaths among patients already in hospitals and other vulnerable groups during evacuation. Since nuclear disasters can affect hundreds of thousands of people, a substantial number of people are at risk of physical and mental harm in each disaster. During the recovery period after a nuclear disaster, physicians might need to screen for psychological burdens and provide general physical and mental health care for many affected residents who might experience long-term displacement. Reliable communication of personalised risks has emerged as a challenge for health-care professionals beyond the need to explain radiation protection. To overcome difficulties of risk communication and provide decision aids to protect workers, vulnerable people, and residents after a nuclear disaster, physicians should receive training in nuclear disaster response. This training should include evidence-based interventions, support decisions to balance potential harms and benefits, and take account of scientific uncertainty in provision of community health care. An open and joint learning process is essential to prepare for, and minimise the effects of, future nuclear disasters.

A nuclear criticality accident occurred in Japan on September 30, 1999, which resulted in severe exposure of three victims to mixed flux of neutrons and gamma-rays. Estimated average doses for the three victims were 5.4 Gy of neutrons and 8.5 Gy of gamma-rays for Patient A, 2.9 Gy of neutrons and 4.5 Gy of gamma-rays for Patient B, and 0.81 Gy of neutrons and 1.3 Gy of gamma-rays for Patient C. They then suffered the consequences of the effects of ionizing radiation resulting in acute radiation syndrome. In Patients A and B, bone marrow failure was so severe that they received haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The graft initially took successfully in both patients, although in Patient B it was later taken over by his own haematopoietic cells. They also suffered from severe skin lesions, later exhibited gastrointestinal bleeding and eventually died of multiple organ failure 82 and 210 days after the accident, respectively. The survival of these patients beyond the period of agranulocytosis means that bone marrow failure per se caused by exposure to ionizing radiation may now be overcome. Patient C also developed bone marrow failure and was treated with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as well as supportive care. He recovered without major complications and is now under periodical follow-up. Remarkably, during the prodromal phase, all the patients exhibited hypoxaemia, two of whom also showed interstitial oedema of the lungs. In Patient C these manifestations improved within a week. The circumstances of the accident and the initial medical treatment of the victims are described.