Infection prevention and control in CT Part 2: Radiographers' and radiology nurses' perceptions of high-risk scenarios contributing to non-adherence to IPC protocols

Abstract

IntroductionAdherence to standard and transmission-based precautions in the computed tomography (CT) setting is central to effective infection prevention and control (IPC), yet there is limited evidence about medical imaging (MI) professionals' self-reported predictors of IPC breaches. This is the second of a two-part series on IPC in the CT setting. Part 1 reported on Australian baseline data relating to intravenous contrast media administration and power injectors. Part 2 presents Australian radiographers' and radiology nurses' perceptions of clinical situations that reduce adherence to standard and transmission-based precautions in CT. MethodsA self-administered survey was distributed to Australian radiographers and radiology nurses working in CT. Responses to an open-ended question “If I was to not adhere to the standard and transmission-based precautions in the CT department, it is most likely when …” was analysed using inductive coding for themes, followed by deductive analysis mapped to the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model. ResultsStudy participants (n = 136) were radiographers (n = 119; 87.5%) and nurses (n = 17; 12.5%). ‘Four themes were derived from the inductive analysis: (1) high-risk working conditions, (2) compliance with good practice, (3) attitudes and practice, and (4) quality of communication. Deductive analysis, using the SEIPS domains revealed that predominant issues related to ‘Tasks’ (43.7%) and ‘Organisation’ (30.6%) followed by issues related to ‘Person’ (16.9%), ‘Tools and technology’ (6.9%) and ‘Environment’ (1.9%). ConclusionMulti-faceted pressures on radiology staff may compromise adherence to standard and transmission-based precautions in CT. Task difficulty, time pressures whilst undertaking tasks, and reduced staffing could lead to lower adherence to standard and transmission-based precautions. Implications for practiceFuture studies that focus on evaluation of ‘Tasks’ and ‘Organisation’ domains of the SEIPS model may provide further insights to non-adherence behaviours in MI.