Patient safety: At the centre of all we do

The December 2016 special issue of Radiography (Volume 22, Supplement 1) revolved around the important topic of patient safety. In their editorial, Nightingale and Snaith open by describing patient safety as "a topic clearly of immense importance to our profession and to the public we serve". This view is not likely to change, and patient-safety related topics will remain a constant in terms of the papers published in Radiography and indeed in all journals linked to the fields of medical imaging / radiology and radiation oncology. There are many ways to define patient safety. The top two definitions, ranked by leading institutions across Europe, involved in radiography education, were: "Reducing the incidence of unnecessary disease, injuries, adverse events and deaths caused topatients through the delivery of therapeutic or diagnostic procedures." and "A safe healthcare environment based on having access to the best technology available, the best trained professionals, the best designed healthcare processes and facilities.

Artificial intelligence: The opinions of radiographers and radiation therapists in Ireland

Introduction: Implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into medical imaging is much debated. Diagnostic Radiographers (DRs) and Radiation Therapists (RTTs) are at the forefront of this technological leap, thus an understanding of their views, in particular changes to their current roles, is key to safe, optimal implementation. Methods: An online survey was designed, including themes: role changes, clinical priorities for AI, patient benefits, and education. It was distributed nationally in the Republic of Ireland via the national professional body, clinical management, and social media. Results: 318 DRs and 77 RTTs participated. Priority areas for development included quality assurance, clinical audit, radiation dose optimisation, and improved workflow for DRs and treatment planning algorithm optimisation, clinical audit, and post processing for RTTs. There was resistance regarding AI use for patient facing roles and final image interpretation. 27.6% of DRs and 40.3% of RTTs currently use AI clinically and 46.1% of DRs and 41.2% of RTTs anticipate reduced staffing levels with AI. 64.9% of DRs and 70.6% of RTTs felt AI will be positive for patients, with the majority promoting AI regulation through national legislation. 86.1% of DRs and 94.0% of RTTs were favourable to AI implementation. Conclusion: This research identifies priority AI development and implementation areas for DRs and RTTs. It thus highlights that DRs and RTTs should be involved in development of AI tools that would best support practice, and that clearly defined pathways for AI implementation into these key professions requires discussion so that optimum use and patient safety can ensue. Implications for practice: Understanding opinions of AI has significant implications for practice, for ensuring optimal product development, implementation, and training, together with planning for potential DR and RTT role changes

Palestinian Conference on Medical Radiation Sciences 2022 Selected Abstracts

The Palestinian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists (PAMRT) became a member of the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS) in February 2021. Through this relationship, the EFRS has been supportive of the activities undertaken by PAMRT to raise the profile of the profession in Palestine; to enhance the education and training of professionals; to open international collaborative opportunities for PAMRT and their members; and, to promote research opportunities within the profession in Palestine. It is regarding these final two points that the EFRS, together with the Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR) as the owners of the journal, and the Radiography journal leadership, were happy to collaborate with PAMRT for the Palestinian Conference on Medical Radiation Sciences (PCMRS) 2022.doi is confusing, brings you also to another article Radiation Therapy in the Management of Adrenal Metastases 10.1016/j.radi.2022.11.001 so I have to add it as https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semradonc.2022.11.001 in order to get to the actual item I am working o

Neuroimaging in dementia and Alzheimer's disease: Current protocols and practice in the Republic of Ireland

Introduction: Neuroimaging plays an essential supportive role in the diagnosis of dementia, assisting in establishing the dementia subtype(s). This has significant value in both treatment and care decisions and has important implications for prognosis. This study aims to explore the development and nature of neuroimaging protocols currently used in the assessment of dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Methods: An online questionnaire was designed and distributed to lead radiography personnel working in computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) departments (n = 94) in both hospital-based and out-patient imaging centres in the Republic of Ireland. Results: Response rates for each modality ranged from 42 to 44%. CT, MRI, and PET were used to specifically diagnose dementia or AD by 43%, 40% and 50% of responding centres respectively. Of these, dementia-specific neuroimaging protocols were utilised in 33%, 50% and 100% of CT, MRI and PET centres respectively, with the remainder using either standard or other non-specific protocols. Both radiologists and clinical specialist radiographers participated in the development of the majority of protocols. The Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) guidelines were most commonly referenced as informing protocol development, however, none of the MRI respondents were able to identify any guidelines used to inform MR protocol development. Conclusion: Currently there is no consensus in Ireland on optimal dementia/AD neuroimaging protocols, particularly for PET and MRI. Similarly the use of validated and published guidelines to inform protocols is not universal.European Commission - European Regional Development Fun

Current Practice in the Referral of Individuals with Suspected Dementia for Neuroimaging by General Practitioners in Ireland and Wales

Objectives: While early diagnosis of dementia is important, the question arises whether general practitioners (GPs) should engage in direct referrals. The current study investigated current referral practices for neuroimaging in dementia, access to imaging modalities and investigated related GP training in Ireland and North Wales. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to GPs in the programme regions which included approximately two thirds of all GPs in the Republic of Ireland and all general practitioners in North Wales. A total of 2,093 questionnaires were issued. Results: 48.6% of Irish respondents and 24.3%of Welsh respondents directly referred patients with suspected dementia for neuroimaging. Irish GPs reported greater direct access to neuroimaging than their Welsh counterparts. A very small percentage of Irish and Welsh GPs (4.7% and 10% respectively) had received training in neuroimaging and the majority who referred patients for neuroimaging were not aware of any dementia-specific protocols for referrals (93.1% and 95% respectively). Conclusions: The benefits of direct GP access to neuroimaging investigations for dementia have yet to be established. Our findings suggest that current GP speciality training in Ireland and Wales is deficient in dementia-specific and neuroimaging training with the concern being that inadequate training will lead to inadequate referrals. Further training would complement guidelines and provide a greater understanding of the role and appropriateness of neuroimaging techniques in the diagnosis of dementia.European Commission - European Regional Development FundUniversity College DublinBangor UniversityTrinity College Dubli

Research ethics training, challenges, and suggested improvements across Europe: Radiography research ethics standards for Europe (RRESFE)

Introduction: The Radiography Research Ethics Standards for Europe (RRESFE) project aimed to provide a cross-sectional view of the current state of radiography research ethics across Europe. This included investigating education and training in research ethics, and identifying the key challenges and potential improvements associated with using existing research ethics frameworks. Methods: This cross-sectional online survey targeting radiography researchers in Europe was conducted between April 26 and July 12, 2021. Descriptive and analytical statistics were used to identify research ethics education and training trends. Content analysis of qualitative responses was employed to identify significant challenges and proposed improvements in research ethics frameworks of practice. Results: There were 232 responses received across 33 European countries. Most (n = 132; 57%) respondents had received some research ethics training; however, fewer participants had received training on safeguarding vulnerable patients (n = 72; 38%), diversity and inclusivity (n = 62; 33%), or research with healthy volunteers (n = 60; 32%). Training was associated with a greater perceived importance of the need for research ethics review (p = 0.031) and with the establishment of EQF Level 6 training (p = 0.038). The proportion of formally trained researchers also varied by region (p = <0.001). Time-to-ethics-approval was noted as the biggest challenge for professionals making research ethics applications. Conclusion: Early and universal integration of research-oriented teaching within the radiography education framework which emphasises research ethics is recommended. Additionally, study findings suggest research ethics committee application and approval processes could be further simplified and streamlined. Implications for practice: The survey contributes to a growing body of knowledge surrounding the importance of education and training in research ethics for assuring a high standard of research outputs in Radiography and has identified hurdles to obtaining research ethics approval for further investigation and address

Research ethics systems, processes, and awareness across Europe: Radiography research ethics standards for Europe (RRESFE)

Introduction: The Radiography Research Ethics Standards for Europe (RRESFE) project aims to provide a cross-sectional snapshot of current research ethics systems, processes, and awareness of such, across Europe together with identifying the associated challenges, education, and training needs. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey targeting radiography researchers in Europe was conducted. Data collection took place between April 26 and July 12, 2021, using a snowball sampling approach. Descriptive and analytical statistics were used to identify trends in research ethics frameworks across Europe. Results: 285 responses were received across 33 European and 23 non-European countries. Most (n = 221; 95%) European respondents stated ethics approval is required before commencing research in their country. Requirements around research ethics approval and awareness of such requirements varied by European region (X2 (2, n = 129) = 7.234, p = 0.013) and were found to differ depending on the type of research participant and study design. Additionally, European respondents reported ethics approval is a national requirement more often than their non-European counterparts (X2 (1, n = 282) = 4.316, p = 0.049). Requirements for ethics approval were also associated with the undergraduate programme duration (2-year vs. 3-year vs. 3.5 year vs. 4-year vs. multiple programme durations; X2 (4, n = 231) = 10.075, p = 0.016) and availability of postgraduate training (postgraduate training available vs. postgraduate training not available; X2 (1, n = 231) = 15.448, p = <0.001) within respondents’ country. Conclusion: Respondents from countries with longer programme durations/availability of multiple programme lengths, availability of postgraduate training, and establishment of European Qualifications Framework Level 6 were generally associated with less uncertainty and more comprehensive research ethics requirements. Implications for practice: Results are informative of the current status of research ethics within evidence-based radiography

A systematic review of person-centred adjustments to facilitate magnetic resonance imaging for autistic patients without the use of sedation or anaesthesia

Magnetic resonance imaging is widely used for different diagnostic examinations involving autistic patients. The noisy, narrow, isolating magnetic resonance imaging environment and long scan times may not be suitable for autistic individuals, given their communication challenges, sensory sensitivities and often heightened anxiety. This systematic review aims to reveal any reasonable and feasible radiography-based adjustments to facilitate magnetic resonance imaging scanning without the use of sedation or general anaesthesia. Nine electronic databases were systematically searched. Out of 4442 articles screened, 53 were deemed directly relevant; when assessed against eligibility criteria, only 21 were finally included in this systematic review. Customising communication was found to be a key adjustment, as well as scan-based optimisation and environmental adaptations. The importance of distraction techniques and use of technology for familiarisation with the processes was also highlighted. The results of this study can inform recommendations to improve magnetic resonance imaging practice and patient experience, without the use of sedation or anaesthesia, where feasible. They can also inform the basis of dedicated training for magnetic resonance imaging radiographers. Lay abstract: Autistic patients often undergo magnetic resonance imaging examinations. Within this environment, it is usual to feel anxious and overwhelmed by noises, lights or other people. The narrow scanners, the loud noises and the long examination time can easily cause panic attacks. This review aims to identify any adaptations for autistic individuals to have a magnetic resonance imaging scan without sedation or anaesthesia. Out of 4442 articles screened, 53 more relevant were evaluated and 21 were finally included in this study. Customising communication, different techniques to improve the environment, using technology for familiarisation and distraction have been used in previous studies. The results of this study can be used to make suggestions on how to improve magnetic resonance imaging practice and the autistic patient experience. They can also be used to create training for the healthcare professionals using the magnetic resonance imaging scanners.Society and College of Radiographers CORIPSCity Radiography Research Fun

Toward Autism-Friendly Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Exploring Autistic Individuals' Experiences of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scans in the United Kingdom, a Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND: Autistic individuals might undergo a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination for clinical concerns or research. Increased sensory stimulation, lack of appropriate environmental adjustments, or lack of streamlined communication in the MRI suite may pose challenges to autistic patients and render MRI scans inaccessible. This study aimed at (i) exploring the MRI scan experiences of autistic adults in the United Kingdom; (ii) identifying barriers and enablers toward successful and safe MRI examinations; (iii) assessing autistic individuals' satisfaction with MRI service; and (iv) informing future recommendations for practice improvement. METHODS: We distributed an online survey to the autistic community on social media, using snowball sampling. Inclusion criteria were: being older than 16, have an autism diagnosis or self-diagnosis, self-reported capacity to consent, and having had an MRI scan in the United Kingdom. We used descriptive statistics for demographics, inferential statistics for group comparisons/correlations, and content analysis for qualitative data. RESULTS: We received 112 responses. A total of 29.6% of the respondents reported not being sent any information before the scan. Most participants (68%) confirmed that radiographers provided detailed information on the day of the examination, but only 17.1% reported that radiographers offered some reasonable environmental adjustments. Only 23.2% of them confirmed they disclosed their autistic identity when booking MRI scanning. We found that quality of communication, physical environment, patient emotions, staff training, and confounding societal factors impacted their MRI experiences. Autistic individuals rated their overall MRI experience as neutral and reported high levels of claustrophobia (44.8%). CONCLUSION: This study highlighted a lack of effective communication and coordination of care, either between health care services or between patients and radiographers, and lack of reasonable adjustments as vital for more accessible and person-centered MRI scanning for autistic individuals. Enablers of successful scans included effective communication, adjusted MRI environment, scans tailored to individuals' needs/preferences, and well-trained staff

The impact of COVID-19 upon student radiographers and clinical training in Latin America

Introduction: This study aimed to identify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon radiography education across Latin American countries. Methods: A survey containing 20 questions was circulated to radiography students, across 13 universities in 11 countries of Latin America using Google Forms. The survey contained open and closed questions. Answers were analysed with descriptive statistics and the methodology of interpretative phenomenological analysis for the open answers. Results: Of the 1310 responses only 23.9% (n = 313) of students reported attending clinical placements and from this cohort only 8.9% (n = 28) became infected with COVID-19. In response to how the pandemic had impacted upon the students’ academic progression, the most common topic in the open answers was “Concerns about the lack of clinical training”, mentioned by 629 students. Students in middle and later years of their radiography education expressed the greatest concern about future clinical placements. Almost all radiography students (95.2%/n = 1247) indicated that their main concerns regarding COVID-19 infection while undertaking clinical placements was in relation to the risk of infecting their families as most students stated they cohabited with relatives (86.6%/n = 1134). Conclusion: Compared to European findings co-habitation trends increased anxiety related to infection and impacted their mental health. Students expressed concern about the quality of education they were receiving during the pandemic and access to resources to facilitate on-line learning was inadequate. Socio-economic and internet connectivity factors specific to Latin America were identified and these issues need to be addressed if on-line education is required in the future. Implications for practice: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted Latin America and this study identifies the implications for radiography students related to their clinical and academic training and highlights factors which require consideration to support radiography students as the pandemic continues.Universidad de Costa RicaI accepted this 'version of record' in good faith as it is COVID 19 related, and I imagine the COVID-19 resource centre applies to this article and it was active at the time. Please supervise it and adapt accordingly, thank yo