Search

Introduction: The development of diagnostic imaging services manifests features specific to the Scottish environment, in particular development of the radiographic workforce through implementing skills mix and role developments to enhance outcomes for patients. A component of a College of Radiographers Industry Partnership Scheme (CoRIPS) supported study, this research investigates perspectives of strategic service managers with Health Board responsibility for service delivery., Method: A questionnaire survey was administered to strategic service managers across Scotland (N = 14), followed up with telephone interviews. There was a return rate of 57% (n = 8) for the questionnaires and n = 4 agreed to be interviewed. Data collected related to radiographer roles across their Board area; awareness and understanding of service development issues and features as well as perspective on opportunities and barriers in the context of Scottish Government policy, workforce logistics, attitudes and inter-professional relationships., Results: The results indicate evidence of financial, logistical and political barriers to service evolution, offset by a sense of optimism that scope for beneficial change may be approaching. There are a range of significant initiatives in place and an appetite exists to pursue the development of radiographer roles and skill mix for the benefit of service users more generally., Conclusion: The difficulties in achieving change are well understood and there are basic issues related to finance and industrial relations. There are also however, cultural elements to contend with in the form of attitudes demonstrated by some radiographers and significantly, the radiological community whose influence on the practice of independently regulated radiographers seems incongruent., (Copyright © 2017 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Participatory research is increasingly advocated for use in health and health services research and has been defined as a 'process of producing new knowledge by systematic enquiry, with the collaboration of those being studied'. The underlying philosophy of participatory research is that those recruited to studies are acknowledged as experts who are 'empowered to truly participate and have their voices heard'. Research methods should enable children to express themselves. This has led to the development of creative approaches of working with children that offer alternatives to, for instance, the structured questioning of children by researchers either through questionnaires or interviews., Objective: To examine the feasibility and potential of developing participatory methods in imaging research., Materials and Methods: We employed three innovative methods of data collection sequentially, namely the provision of: 1) a graffiti wall; 2) cameras, and 3) a video box for children's use. While the graffiti wall was open to all who attended the department, for the other two methods children were allocated to each 'arm' consecutively until our target of 20 children for each was met., Results: The study demonstrated that it was feasible to use all three methods of data collection within the context of a busy radiology department. We encountered no complaints from staff, patients or parents. Children were willing to participate but we did not collect data to establish if they enjoyed the activities, were pleased to have the opportunity to make comments or whether anxieties about their treatment inhibited their participation. The data yield was disappointing. In particular, children's contributions to the graffiti wall were limited, but did reflect the nature of graffiti, and there may have been some 'copycat' comments. Although data analysis was relatively straightforward, given the nature of the data (short comments and simple drawings), the process proved to be extremely time-consuming. This was despite the modest amount of data collected., Conclusions: Novel methods of engaging with children have been shown to be feasible although further work is needed to establish their full potential.

Objective: To establish patients' knowledge of CT, their views of information provided and explore the role of information in imaging., Methods: A sample of 150 first-time outpatients attending for CT scanning at a Scottish hospital. The study had three phases: a questionnaire survey; structured interviews pre-scan and face-to-face interviews post-scan., Results: One hundred and twelve questionnaires were returned with 82 deemed usable. Sixty and 53 respondents participated in the pre-scan and post-scan interviews, respectively. Thirty percent of questionnaire respondents and 57.4% of pre-scan interviewees identified accurately the type of scan to be received. Scores on the knowledge test improved by the time of the pre-scan interview. During all stages of the study family members were described as a source of information. Patients reported clinicians as providing few details about the scan, and there was confusion about how results were communicated. Most interviewees thought the leaflet had prepared them for the procedure., Conclusion: The study revealed a lack of familiarity with CT scanning, diverse informational needs, and the importance of personal contact in information giving., Practice Implications: The study raised wide-ranging issues and highlights the key role of information in the provision of diagnostic health services.

Rationale and Objectives: To undertake a systematic review of literature on patient centred outcomes and explore the use of patient defined outcomes in radiology research., Materials and Methods: i), Data Sources: Published empirical studies in peer reviewed journals. ii), Study Selection: Systematic search of English language radiology literature between 1990-2003, using four electronic databases, and reference lists of papers. Work relating to diagnostic or interventional imaging was included. Screening was excluded, together with articles based solely on the audit of patients' medical records. Patients needed to have inputted directly into the study, for example responding to questionnaires or participating in interviews. iii), Data Extraction: Abstracts were retrieved and relevant full text articles obtained. Each paper was reviewed independently by two reviewers (research team members) using a data extraction form, developed by the authors. Categorisation of papers was undertaken at team meetings., Results: A total of 26 publications met the inclusion criteria for the review. Papers were placed within three categories: i) the primary aim of the study was investigate patient centred outcomes (n = 10); ii) the primary aim of the study was to describe the radiological procedure itself but patient contact was made post-procedure (n = 5) and iii) the primary aim of the study was to investigate patients' experiences during procedures (n = 11). Validated outcome measures were used in 10 studies. None of the outcome measures used were developed specifically for radiology. No papers were found where researchers had used patient defined outcomes., Conclusion: The research highlighted difficulties relating to the review and reporting of outcomes research. The results indicated little patient engagement in outcome research in radiology.

Objectives: To establish the level of patient knowledge of ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); to describe patient information-seeking behaviour before attendance; and to assess patients' understanding of the main aspects of scanning examinations., Design: Survey of people attending for ultrasound, CT and MRI using a questionnaire, including 12 statements on simple aspects of procedures, to be indicated as true or false., Setting: Radiology department of an acute teaching hospital NHS Trust in the north-east of Scotland., Participants: A convenience sample of 500 out-patient, non-emergency first time attenders for ultrasound (300), computed tomography (150), and magnetic resonance imaging (50)., Results: An 82% response rate to the questionnaire was achieved. Less than half the patients (48.9%, 182/372) indicated they knew the type of investigation they had been referred for. When responses were compared with referral letters, 64% (238/372) were incongruent. Few participants hadsought information (32%, 120/372), but of those who had the main source was family and friends (72%, 86/120). Seven participants searched the Internet. Eighty-two percent (308/372) of participants reported having been given an explanation of why an investigation was necessary. The majority of participants (67.8%, 251/372) expected to receive their results within 2 weeks. The mean score on the 12 true/false knowledge statements was 3.8, and 17% (65/372) answered 'Don't know' to all the statements. One person answered all questions correctly., Conclusions: Patients were not well informed regarding these investigations. This has significant implications for information-giving strategies and informed consent., (Copyright 2002 The Royal College of Radiologists.)