MP02-15 ASSESSMENT OF RADIATION SAFETY KNOWLEDGE AMONG HOUSE STAFF REVEALS APPROPRIATE PRECAUTIONS BUT DEFICIENT KNOWLEDGE

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyGeneral & Epidemiological Trends & Socioeconomics: Quality Improvement & Patient Safety I1 Apr 2018MP02-15 ASSESSMENT OF RADIATION SAFETY KNOWLEDGE AMONG HOUSE STAFF REVEALS APPROPRIATE PRECAUTIONS BUT DEFICIENT KNOWLEDGE Andrew Harris, Marilyn Hopkins, John Loomis, and Jason Bylund Andrew HarrisAndrew Harris More articles by this author , Marilyn HopkinsMarilyn Hopkins More articles by this author , John LoomisJohn Loomis More articles by this author , and Jason BylundJason Bylund More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.141AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Urologists, as well as other specialties, are increasingly exposed to fluoroscopy as minimally invasive techniques continue to become more widespread. Fluoroscopy, or electromagnetic radiation, can be harmful due to cellular damage. Appropriate knowledge of and safety precautions concerning fluoroscopy are necessary and ideally should be taught in training. METHODS A 20 question survey was constructed to assess radiation safety training, attitudes, knowledge, and behavior. The survey was sent via REDCap to house staff routinely involved fluoroscopic cases, which included urology, orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, radiology, general surgery, anesthesia, plastic surgery, cardiology, vascular surgery, and gastroenterology. RESULTS 61 of 218 (28%) participants responded during the 2 week study period. 57% have received fluoroscopic radiation safety education informally, with 28% receiving both informal and formal education. When asked about directional X-travel and exposure, only 20% answered correctly with 25% being unsure, 18% stating no difference, and 38% choosing flow originating below the patient exposes the operator to more radiation. When asked about conditions potentially related to radiation exposure, 86% believe infertility is potentially related to exposure, 87% cataracts, 87% leukemia and lymphoma, 59% central nervous system tumors, 71% birth defects, and 3% diabetes. When asked about protection, 20% wear lead lined glasses, 23% dosimeters, 92% thyroid shields, 2% lead gloves, 92% lead apron, 48% lead shield, and 1.6% nothing. When asked about fluoroscopy machine settings, 12% knew the machine used was set to continuous, 39% pulse, and 49% were unsure. 64% were aware of the directional travel concerning the machine routinely used. When asked about safety techniques, 98% knew decreasing time and 100% knew wearing protective materials were ways to decrease exposure. When asked about distance and exposure, only 56% answered correctly. The majority of respondents believe radiation safety is important (87%) and would like more formal education (52.5%). Concerning items, see Figure 1. CONCLUSIONS Fluoroscopic radiation safety knowledge is low among house staff routinely using fluoroscopy. Further study and likely increased formal education is warranted. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e17-e18 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Andrew Harris More articles by this author Marilyn Hopkins More articles by this author John Loomis More articles by this author Jason Bylund More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...