The Canadian journal of medical radiation technology最新文献

This clinical teaching guide is intended to highlight strategies available to radiation therapists in order to promote knowledge, critical thinking, and treatment delivery competence among radiotherapy students when treating patients for cancers of the head and neck. Development of patient care skills through the use of role-playing will be discussed. A case study approach will be discussed in order to facilitate critical thinking skills among students. Development of technical skills among radiotherapy students will include the use of treatment set-up simulation as well as an image matching simulation exercise. At the conclusion of this guide, treatment delivery competency assessment and evaluation for cancers of the head and neck will be discussed.

While patient use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) during cancer treatment is popular, its research is limited. It is anticipated that practices differ considerably amongst practitioners and cancer centres. This study explored current variability in Ontario cancer centres regarding departmental policies and patient education literature for CAM.

A semi-structured telephone survey was used to gather data from nine radiation therapy departments across Ontario. One representative was purposefully selected from each centre.

Analysis of quantitative data was mainly descriptive and representational, while qualitative data was evaluated using thematic analysis.

While six of nine centres had policies on CAM, only two centres considered their policies as sufficient. For patient education literature, five of nine centres had literature on CAM, but only one centre deemed it sufficient.

The results demonstrated considerable differences regarding CAM policies and patient education literature in Ontario cancer centres. A common theme was that policies and literature were either too general or absent altogether. A standardized approach would ensure consistent patient teaching on this topic.

The purpose of the study was to investigate ambient light levels in three environments where radiological images are viewed, including radiologist reporting areas, radiographer viewing stations, and radiographer wards to compare recorded levels with recommendations and consider possible causal agents for excessive levels. Ambient lighting at 30 cm and 100 cm from the display device was measured with a calibrated Nuclear Associates 07-621 photometer (Hicksville, New York). Two hospitals participated in this investigation and all monitors (n=89) used within each hospital for the viewing/reporting of radiological images were included. Values obtained were compared with recommended levels and comparisons were made between hospitals for the same viewing area using the Mann Whitney-U non-parametric statistical test. Of the monitors studied, 74 percent adhered to the World Health Organization recommended maximum of 100 lux at 30 cm from the image, while compliance fell to 45 percent when values recorded at 100 cm were compared to the European Commission guideline maximum of 50 lux. Most of the monitors with excessive ambient lighting were located in ward areas, with one hospital demonstrating 7 percent compliance in this environment. Statistical differences were shown between hospitals for radiology (p<0.0001) and ward (p<0.01) areas. It is clear from the data provided that planning is required in the positioning of display devices with careful consideration of artificial and natural lighting if diagnostic efficacy is not to be compromised. Ambient light measurement techniques require standardization.

Under the Health Professions procedural code of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (RHPA), the College of Medical Radiation Technologists of Ontario (CMRTO) is required to provide a means to assess how people in the profession actually perform in practice. As the first step in satisfying the practice assessment requirement of the Quality Assurance program in 2004, the CMRTO retained Edumetrics Ltd. to undertake the development of a multi-source feedback (MSF) program specific to the profession of medical radiation technology.

In a comprehensive study led by Dr. Claudio Violato, a professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary and an expert in the development of program evaluations, psychometrics, research methods and statistics, the CMRTO developed a 'multi-source' assessment process that provides a means for peers, colleagues, patients and the assessed person to complete a survey focused on the standards of practice. The assessed person receives a summary assessment report or feedback about his or her performance. The multi-source feedback assessment provides a formative evaluation, providing continuous reaction to the performance of a medical radiation technologist (MRT). It compares the MRT's clinical performance to that of other MRTs. The CMRTO multi-source practice assessment approach was piloted in 2005.

A number of strategies were used to recruit 327 MRTs to take part in the pilot study. Recruitment strategies included consultation with MRTs respecting the standards of practice as the basis of the MSF project, a detailed communication strategy and telephone recruitment. Although the CMRTO staff experienced challenges in recruiting MRTs to take part in the pilot study and dealing with the resultant feedback, the pilot study was considered a success.

Error reporting is a complex task that needs to be carried out in an effective manner if the desired outcomes of patient protection are to be maximized. This requires a clear understanding of related definitions and concepts, an appreciation of the impact “under reporting” has on patient safety, and the recognition of the barriers and incentives to error reporting. This article addresses these issues in addition to factors that make error reporting systems effective. An in-depth literature review was conducted and included various related studies.

The findings of this review demonstrate that overcoming the challenges to effective error reporting primarily involves creating a culture of safety in which transparency and fairness prevail, and in which all parties learn from and feel comfortable sharing information about mistakes, and work together to prevent their recurrence.

This paper provides an overview of the eight components of a radiation safety program in a large health care facility spread out over several campuses in a large geographic area in Nova Scotia. The main focus is based on those areas that are regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and generally encompass nuclear medicine and radiation therapy operations. X-ray operations are regulated provincially, but the general operational principles of an effective radiation safety program can be applied in all these areas. The main components covered include the set up of an organizational structure that operates separately from individual departments, general items expected from reports to corporate management or regulators, and some examples of the front-line expectations for those in individual departments. The review is not all encompassing, but should give organizations some insight of the magnitude of a radiation safety program in a district style environment.