Abstract

A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 21 February to 31 March 2019 in five major hospitals of Peshawar, Pakistan. A 30-item questionnaire was adopted from the existing literature containing both open and closed-ended questions and the authors conducted a pilot study among 25 participants to assess the face validity of the tool. A universal sampling technique was adopted. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the findings of the study. Less than half of the participants could correctly classify iodinated contrast media used in radiology on the basis of ionicity and osmolaity. Sixty-three percent chose severe contrast material-induced allergic reaction as type I hypersensitivity reaction while almost half of them correctly identified the features of iodinated contrast media associated with lesser side effects. Very few of them (6.7%) had read the ACR 2018 manual on contrast media. Regarding the risk factors for acute adverse reactions and signs/symptoms of anaphylaxis few could answer satisfactorily. Twenty-eight percent of participants correctly identified epinephrine as the initial medication in an anaphylactic reaction. Regarding the preferred route of administration, concentration and dose of epinephrine, the participants' correct response was quite poor (43.8%, 6.7%, and 8.6%, respectively). More than 65% of participants could name a single intravenous corticosteroid and antihistamine. Radiology personnel's knowledge regarding contrast material and management of severe contrast material-induced allergic reactions is unsatisfactory.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call