Maltese public perceptions about ionising radiation as part of medical imaging examinations

Abstract

Introduction: Medical Imaging (MI) examinations are important for the diagnosis and treatment of various diseases and disorders. Despite the benefits of MI, studies have shown that the general public’s knowledge of the use of ionising radiation (IR) in MI examinations may vary thereby possibly affecting their decisions about their health. Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify and explore Maltese adults’ current perceptions and knowledge of IR as part of MI examinations. Methodology: The study adopted a quantitative, prospective, cross-sectional design whereby data was collected through a self-designed online questionnaire. The target population consisted of Maltese people aged 18 years and over. The questionnaire was posted on social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, twitter and LinkedIn) for a period of four weeks; hence, non-probability sampling was used. Results: Two hundred and eighty-five (285) completed questionnaires were obtained from the Maltese public. Findings showed that the majority of the participants were familiar with the MI examinations that involve IR. Approximately one-fifth of the respondents (19.6%) thought that ultrasound (US) makes use of IR, while half of the respondents (50.5%) thought that MRI does. Furthermore, most participants (60%) were aware that children are more sensitive to IR, less than half (44.9%) knew that different organs have different sensitivities to radiation. Results indicated that the participants think about the need and benefit of MI examinations more than the associated doses and risks prior to undergoing a MI examination. The participants were interested in receiving more information about the health effects and risks of IR (47%) and the different types of MI examinations (10%). Conclusion: Based on the conclusions of the study, several recommendations were proposed, such as, more means of information should be provided through hospital updated leaflets using symbols and verbal scales to indicate the dose level. Another suggestion was to provide a communication toolkit to convey information according to the individual’s need.