Abstract
ObjectivesThis study assessed students’ awareness of radiation exposures and determined the impact a curriculum in clinical radiology (CICR) had on awareness.MethodsSix hundred seventy medical students at one medical school were studied. CICR was delivered in yearly modules over the 5-year programme. Five hundred twenty-three students (years 1–5), exposed to increasing numbers of CICR modules and 147 students beginning medical school (year 0), represented the study and control groups, respectively. Students completed a multiple choice questionnaire assessing radiation knowledge and radiology teaching.ResultsMost students in the study population received CICR but 87% considered they had not received radiation protection instruction. The percentage of correctly answered questions was significantly higher in the study population than the control group (59.7% versus 38%, p < 0.001). Students who received CICR achieved higher scores than those who did not (61.3% compared with 42.8%, p < 0.001). Increasing exposure to CICR with each year of medical education was associated with improved performance.ConclusionsAssessment of students’ awareness of radiation exposures in diagnostic imaging demonstrates improved performance with increasing years in medical school and/or increasing exposure to CICR. Findings support the Euroatom 97 directive position, advocating implementation of radiation protection instruction into the undergraduate medical curriculum.
Highlights
In recent years, studies have documented increasing patient radiation exposures, which can be attributed to increased utilisation of diagnostic imaging studies, computed tomography (CT)
Eighty-two percent of the study population compared with 4.1% of controls had been exposed to lectures or teaching in diagnostic radiology prior to completing the questionnaire
The study population performed much better than the control group with mean scores of 60% and 38%, respectively (p
Summary
Studies have documented increasing patient radiation exposures, which can be attributed to increased utilisation of diagnostic imaging studies, computed tomography (CT). Almost 16% of patients received cumulative effective doses greater than 75 mSv, and such levels of radiation exposure have been reported to be associated with a 7.3% increase in mortality from cancer [2]. Excellent__ good__ average__ poor__ no knowledge__ If you have formal training outside current undergraduate medical course please specify_____ 3. Yes / No d)Final medical year lectures/ tutorials? Yes / No / Don’t know for each option a) MRI b) Chest x-ray c) US d) CT e) Conventional fluoroscopy (barium studies) f) Mammography g) Angiography h) All of the above 6. In a chest x-ray, the radiation dose is the same as natural background radiation received in: a) Less than 1 week b) 1 month c) 6 months d) 1 year e) Greater than one year f) Don’t know 7. The radiation dose is approximately the same as how many chest x-rays? a) 0 b) 20-50 c) 80-150 d) 300-1000 e) 10,000-20,000 f) Don’t know
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
