Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/93029
Title: An investigation of procedural radiation dose level awareness and personal training experience in communicating ionizing radiation examinations benefits and risks to patients in two European cardiac centers
Authors: Banerjee, Ipshita
McNulty, Jonathan P.
Catania, D.
Maccagni, D.,
Masterson, L.
Portelli, Jonathan L.
Rainford, Louise
Keywords: Radiation -- Dosage -- Reporting
Radiation -- Dosage -- Standards
Radiation -- Dosage -- Safety measures
Cardiologists -- Attitudes
Heart -- Imaging
Medical radiology -- Safety measures
Issue Date: 2019
Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Citation: Banerjee, I., McNulty, J. P., Catania, D., Maccagni, D., Masterson, L., Portelli, J. L., & Rainford, L. (2019). An investigation of procedural radiation dose level awareness and personal training experience in communicating ionizing radiation examinations benefits and risks to patients in two European cardiac centers. Health Physics, 117(1), 76-83.
Abstract: Purpose: Cardiac interventional practitioners need to be appropriately informed regarding radiation dose quantities and risks. Communicating benefit-risk information to patients requires attention as specified in Basic Safety Standards Directive 2013/59/Eurotom. This study investigated the awareness of procedural radiation dose levels and the impact of personal training experience in communicating ionizing radiation benefit-risks to patients. Methodology: A questionnaire, consisting of 28 questions, was distributed directly to adult and pediatric interventional cardiology specialists at specialized cardiovascular imaging centers in Dublin, Ireland and Milan, Italy. Results: A total of 18 interventional cardiologists (senior registrar to consultant grades with between 2 y to over 21 y experience in cardiac imaging) participated. The majority of participants (n = 17) stated that parents of pediatric and adult patients should be informed of the potential benefits and risk. All participants indicated they had radiation safety training; however, 50% had not received training in radiation examination benefit-risk communication. Despite this, 77.8% (n = 14) participants indicated a high confidence level in successfully explaining risks and/or benefits of cardiac imaging procedures. When asked to estimate effective dose (ED) values for common cardiac imaging procedures less than 50% identified appropriate dose ranges. All participants underestimated procedural dose values based on recent European data. 50% (n = 9) participants answered all questions correctly for a number of true or false radiation risk statements. Conclusion: Benefit-risk communication training deficits and inaccurate understanding of radiation dose levels was identified. Further research and training to support clinicians using radiation on a daily basis is required.
URI: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/93029
Appears in Collections:Scholarly Works - FacHScRad



Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.