EuroSafe Imaging 2020
Action 6 - Clinical audit tool for imaging, Radioprotection / Radiation dose, CT, Fluoroscopy, MR, Diagnostic procedure, Education and training, Prospective, Not applicable, Multicentre study
A. C. Belhadj Mostefa, S. Elsobky, A. Santhirasekaram, M. Khalifa
Description of activity and work performed
Methodology: Standard questionnaires (Figure 1) were handed out amongst all staff in a radiology department. The forms comprised of twelve questions and was divided into two parts. The first half examined the equivalent dose in “number of PA CXRs” for abdominal X-ray, lumbar spine X-ray, computer tomography (CT) kidney ureter bladder, CT abdomen and pelvis, CT chest, isotope bone scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), angiography and CT brain. Each question was followed by preopositions reflecting four approximate risks of radiation should a patient be exposed to a specefic imaging modality. The second part comprised questions regarding the approximate risk of causing a fatal malignancy by performing CT abdomen and pelvis, CT head, lumbar spine XR and CXR.
(The typical effective dose for CXR in the UK is 0.015mSv)
Data aquisition and analysis: 25 forms were distributed to all staff in radiology and there was 22 (88%) responders at the time of collection. The responders included 2 Radiology Consultants, 7 Radiology residents (SpR) and 13 Radiographers. Foundation doctors and Medical students were not included in the study. Data was then prospectively collected over a period of one week and subsequently analyzed by 1 observer (Figure 2)
Results first round: The awareness of radiation doses and the potential added risk of malignancy associated with these doses was found to be 45.80%, 63% and 53.8% for the consultants, residants and radiographers respectively (Figure 3). There was an excellent overall knowledge of abdominal X-ray radiation dose with over 90% of the responders answering correctly. Furthermore, the average (mean) score amongst radiographers was 6.4/12 while the highest mark was also noted to be by a radiographer (12/12).
All candidates were aware that MRI does not involve radiation (100%) and there were no staff responses of ‘Don’t know’. Overall knowledge of dose equivalent of CT head was poor (15% radiographers, >20% SpR) (Figure 2 & 4)
Results second round: All radiology staff were educated for two months after the study has taken place with radiation awareness posters in the department as welll as teaching sessions for the residants and radiographers. The same team took part in the study again and there was a substantial imrovement in knoweledge amongst the radiology staff with and an icrease of knoweledge of radiation in CT head from 20% overall to 80% (Figure 5 & 6)