Poster KIM voor de ECR is nu online te zien via EPOS: https://epos.myesr.org/poster/esr/ecr2022/C-16092 posternummer: C-16092, ECR 2022 Purpose Artificial Intelligence (AI) has developed at high speed the last few years and will substantially change various disciplines (1,2). These changes are also noticeable in the field of radiology, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy. However, the focus of attention has mainly been on the radiologist profession, whereas the role of the radiographer has been largely ignored (3). As long as AI for radiology was focused on image recognition and diagnosis, the little attention for the radiographer might be justifiable. But with AI becoming more and more a part of the workflow management, treatment planning and image reconstruction for example, the work of the radiographer will change. However, their training (courses Medical Imaging and Radiotherapeutic Techniques) hardly contain any AI education. Radiographers in the Netherlands are therefore not prepared for changes that will come with the introduction of AI into everyday work.
LINK
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has changed radiology substantially in the last years, where the focus of attention has mainly been on the radiologist. However, the radiographer’s role has been largely ignored even though AI is also affecting for example patient positioning, treatment planning and image reconstruction: tasks that are typically carried out by radiographers (and RTTs). Radiographers are currently not prepared for the changes in their profession that will come with the introduction of AI into everyday work.
DOCUMENT
The value which research brings to health and wellbeing is unquestioned. Without it, progress in diagnosis, treatment and care would probably cease and the service offered to patients and clients would deteriorate. Engaging student radiographers, and radiographers who are early in their careers, with the research agenda is important as it is this group of people particularly who could go on to make meaningful career-long contributions to the radiographic knowledge base and clinical practice advancements. The radiography profession continues to suffer from a lack of engagement in research and because of this, in 2012, a multi-national collaboration was established to create a residential summer school in order to provide a real research experience to inspire participants to value research and/or carry out research as part of their career. The summer school is called OPTIMAX and it is primarily aimed at BSc student radiographers. MSc students and newly qualified radiographers are welcome to participate; also, university tutors are also welcome too as they can gain greatly from it. For doctoral (e.g. PhD) qualified radiographers, attending OPTIMAX could be a good steppingstone in a post-doctoral career as it offers a good experience in team working in research. It is worth remembering that a doctoral qualification is solely intended to develop research abilities and the research career should start on the day the doctoral qualification is acquired. Sadly, for many individuals within radiography, the day the doctoral qualification is attained is the day research stops. OPTIMAX therefore offers an opportunity to a wide range of people, to inspire and help them gain skills, confidence and insight into how research can be conducted in teams and disseminated for the benefit of others.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: The Netherlands does not have a national guideline for performing radiographic examinations on pregnant patients. Radiographic examination is a generic term for all examinations performed using ionizing radiation, including but not limited to radiographs, fluoroscopy and computed tomography. A pilot study amongst radiographers (Medical Radiation Technologists (MRTs)) showed that standardized practice of radiographic examinations on pregnant women is not evident between Radiology departments and that there is a need for a national guideline as the varying practice methods may lead to confusion and uncertainty amongst both patients and MRTs. Methods: Focus groups consisting of MRTs from several Radiology departments within the Netherlands were used to map ideas and requirements as to what should be included in the national guideline. Nine focus group sessions were organized with a total of 52 participants. Using a previous review (Wit, Fleur; Vroonland, Colinda; Bijwaard H. Pre-natal X-ray exposure and the risk of developing paediatric cancer; a systematic review of risk factors and a comparison of international guidelines. Health Physics 2021; 121 (3):225e233), the following key points were chosen as discussion topics for the focus group sessions: dose reduction, confirming pregnancy and risk communication. Results: Results showed that the participating MRTs did not agree on the use of lead aprons. That the national guideline should include standardized methods to adjust parameters to decrease radiation dose. Focus group participants find it difficult to ask a patient's pregnancy status, especially when dealing with relatively young and old (er) patients. When communicating the level of risk associated with a radiographic examination the participating MRTs would like to be able to use examples and comparisons, preferably by means of a multilingual website. Conclusion: A national guideline must include information on justification, available alternatives, dose reductions methods and confirmation of pregnancy requirements when fetal dose is a significant risk. Implications for practice: A national guideline ensures standardized practice can be implemented in Radiology departments, increasing clarity of the issues for both patients and MRTs.
DOCUMENT
Adequate and sufficient education and training opportunities for medical imaging professionals, such as radiographers, are essential to ensure safe and effective use of artificial intelligence (AI)-based applications in radiology. This study aimed to (1) map the thoughts of radiographers regarding the impact of AI on their field and on their tasks, roles, and responsibilities (2) investigate their perspective and needs regarding AI-education and training and (3) evaluate our custom-designed e-learning ‘AI for radiographers’ (intervention).
DOCUMENT
Abstract gepubliceerd in Elsevier: Introduction: Recent research has identified the issue of ‘dose creep’ in diagnostic radiography and claims it is due to the introduction of CR and DR technology. More recently radiographers have reported that they do not regularly manipulate exposure factors for different sized patients and rely on pre-set exposures. The aim of the study was to identify any variation in knowledge and radiographic practice across Europe when imaging the chest, abdomen and pelvis using digital imaging. Methods: A random selection of 50% of educational institutes (n ¼ 17) which were affiliated members of the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS) were contacted via their contact details supplied on the EFRS website. Each of these institutes identified appropriate radiographic staff in their clinical network to complete an online survey via SurveyMonkey. Data was collected on exposures used for 3 common x-ray examinations using CR/DR, range of equipment in use, staff educational training and awareness of DRL. Descriptive statistics were performed with the aid of Excel and SPSS version 21. Results: A response rate of 70% was achieved from the affiliated educational members of EFRS and a rate of 55% from the individual hospitals in 12 countries across Europe. Variation was identified in practice when imaging the chest, abdomen and pelvis using both CR and DR digital systems. There is wide variation in radiographer training/education across countries.
DOCUMENT
Medical imaging practice changed dramatically with the introduction of digital imaging. Although digital imaging has many advantages, it also has made it easier to delete images that are not of diagnostic quality. Mistakes in imaging—from improper patient positioning, patient movement during the examination, and selecting improper equipment—could go undetected when images are deleted. Such an approach would preclude a reject analysis from which valuable lessons could be learned. In the analog days of radiography, saving the rejected films and then analyzing them was common practice among radiographers. In principle, reject analysis can be carried out easier and with better tools (ie, software) in the digital era, provided that rejected images are stored for analysis. Reject analysis and the subsequent lessons learned could reduce the number of repeat images, thus reducing imaging costs and decreasing patient exposure to radiation. The purpose of this study, which was conducted by order of the Dutch Healthcare Inspectorate, was to investigate whether hospitals in the Netherlands store and analyze failed imaging and, if so, to identify the tools used to analyze those images.
DOCUMENT
Abstract Radiology during pregnancy: risks, radiation protection in medical practice, and communication with the patient. Authors: Harmen Bijwaard, Fleur Wit, Colinda Vroonland, has been accepted as POSTER at the 47th Annual Meeting of the European Radiation Research Society (ERRS 2022), which will be held from September 21st until eptember 24th, 2022 in Catania (Italy). We are very excited about the richness of the topics that are covered by the abstracts and look forward to seeing your poster soon! We inform you that on September 24th we are organizing just for our congress attendees the ETNA EXCURSION with alpine and volcanological guide. The departure will be by bus from Catania. All details about our SOCIAL EVENTS at: http://www.sirr2.it/errs2022/errs2022_social-events.html
DOCUMENT
Introduction: In the Netherlands, Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) have not been based on a national survey as proposed by ICRP. Instead, local exposure data, expert judgment and the international scientific literature were used as sources. This study investigated whether the current DRLs are reasonable for Dutch radiological practice. Methods: A national project was set up, in which radiography students carried out dose measurements in hospitals supervised by medical physicists. The project ran from 2014 to 2017 and dose values were analysed for a trend over time. In the absence of such a trend, the joint yearly data sets were considered a single data set and were analysed together. In this way the national project mimicked a national survey. Results: For six out of eleven radiological procedures enough data was collected for further analysis. In the first step of the analysis no trend was found over time for any of these procedures. In the second step the joint analysis lead to suggestions for five new DRL values that are far below the current ones. The new DRLs are based on the 75 percentile values of the distributions of all dose data per procedure. Conclusion: The results show that the current DRLs are too high for five of the six procedures that have been analysed. For the other five procedures more data needs to be collected. Moreover, the mean weights of the patients are higher than expected. This introduces bias when these are not recorded and the mean weight is assumed to be 77 kg. Implications for practice: The current checking of doses for compliance with the DRLs needs to be changed. Both the procedure (regarding weights) and the values of the DRLs should be updated.
MULTIFILE
Abstract—A survey was conducted among 20 Dutch hospitals about radiation protection for interventional fluoroscopy. This was a follow-up of a previous study in 2007 that led to several recommendations for radiation protection for interventional fluoroscopy. The results indicate that most recommendations have been followed. However, radiation-induced complications from interventional procedures are still often not recorded in the appropriate register. Furthermore, even though professionals with appropriate training in radiation protection are usually involved in interventional procedures, this often is not the case when these procedures are carried out outside the radiology department. Although this involvement is not required by Dutch law, it is recommended to have radiation protection professionals present more often at interventional procedures. Further improvements in radiation protection for interventional fluoroscopy may come from a comparison of dose-reducing practices among hospitals, the introduction of diagnostic reference levels for interventional procedures, and a more thorough form of screening and follow-up of patients
DOCUMENT
