Radiation protection knowledge and practices in interventional cardiologists practicing in Africa: a cross sectional survey

Abstract

We conducted a survey of doctors working in the cardiac catheterisation laboratories in Africa on their knowledge, attitude and practice with respect to radiation protection. Of seventy-two respondents contacted, 61 (84.7%) completed the questionnaire. Twenty-eight, (45.9%) were younger than 45 years. Thirty-seven, (60.6%) had less than 10 years of experience in the laboratory. Only 28 (45.9%) had undertaken radiation protection training. Fifty-eight, (95.1%) consistently used lead aprons. Forty-seven, (77%) reported consistently using thyroid shields. Ten (16.4%) consistently used radiation protection eyeglasses, whilst 36 (59%) never used them. Thermoluminescent Dosimeter badges were consistently used in 23 (37.7%). Forty-two, (68.9%) reported having ceiling mounted lead/acrylic shields. Level of radiation exposure in the most recent one year was ≤2 mSv in 14, between 2 and 20 mSv in 8 and between 20 and 30 mSv in 2, whilst 33 did not know their dose readings. The use of basic radiation protection tools as well as the knowledge and measurement of radiation exposure among interventional cardiologists working in Africa is low. The unavailability of some of the protective tools and a knowledge gap in terms of radiation protection and monitoring of self-exposure were some of the reasons for suboptimal self-protection against ionising radiation among our respondents. We suggest that initiatives be taken by all stakeholders to train this group of medical professionals in basic radiation protection to avoid unnecessary exposure to themselves, co-workers and patients.

Radiation Protection Capability of Operating Room Personnel: Development and Psychometric Properties of a Questionnaire

“…Other similar instruments were designed to examine radiation protection knowledge in operating room nurses, that psychometric properties of almost all of these questionnaires were not confirmed [1,9,11,12]. Therefore, it was not possible to compare the present questionnaire with previous ones in terms of psychometric properties.…”

“…The face validity, content validity, construct validity, internal homogeneity (Cronbach's alpha), and consistency (test-retest) of the questionnaire were evaluated. So far, there has not been any questionnaire particularly designed for evaluating radiation protection capability in the operating room field, and the available instruments were about limited aspects of ra- diation protection capability in the operating room [9][10][11][12][13], and no study considered all aspects of radiation protection capability, specific to the operating room field. Moreover, the methods of validity were not confirmed in almost all of the previous studies and only the result of internal homogeneity (Cronbach's alpha) was reported in some of them.…”

“…In stage one, the items were extracted through literature review, including the national and international guidelines [7,8,26], books [27,28] and related articles within the past 10 years [1,[9][10][11][12][13][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. Then the selected items were evaluated by the panel of experts.…”

“…Awareness of the principles of radiation protection and their observance by nurses working in the operating room has a significant role in reducing the risks of ionizing radiation. [1,[9][10][11][12]. Therefore, a comprehensive tool evaluating all aspects of radiation protection in the operating room personnel could be useful [13].…”

“…Literature review in databases of Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus and so on indicated that there were few questionnaires, specifically designed for measuring radiation protection capability in the operating room field, and the available questionnaires are intended for measuring limited dimensions such as knowledge of radiation protection [1,[9][10][11][12]. Also, few studies were about radiation protection capability while considering the patient safety against radiation [13,16].…”