Radiation Protection Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (RP-KAP) as Predictors of Job Stress Among Radiation Workers in Tehran Province, Iran

Abstract

BackgroundIn recent years, much attention has been paid to occupational stress, but relatively little or no research has been conducted on the influence of knowledge, attitude, and practice of radiation protection (RP-KAP) on job stress among radiation workersObjectivesThis study aims to assess job stress among health care workers in Iran who are occupationally exposed to radiation in order to determine the effects of KAP on self-protection against radiation on their job stress.Materials and MethodsThe population in this descriptive cross-sectional study comprised 670 healthcare workers, including 428 staff with a degree in radiology and 242 other medical personnel who were working in 16 hospitals affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) in Tehran, Iran. The census method was used to sample the workers. In total, 264 staff with a degree in radiology and 149 other medical personnel completed the job content questionnaire (JCQ) and the RP-KAP questionnaire from May to November 2014.ResultsThe prevalence rate of job stress was 22.5% based on calculation formulas and possible scores on the JCQ. Sex, RP-knowledge, attitude, practice, and in-service training predicted 41.8% of the variance in job stress. According to the results of the binary logistic regression, workers with higher scores on knowledge (OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.75 - 0.90), attitude (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.63 - 0.82), and practice (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.72 - 0.86) and those who had participated in training programs had significantly lower rates of job stress (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.28 - 0.93).ConclusionsThe effects of RP knowledge, attitude, and practice on job stress were significant. In order to reduce job stress in radiation environments, ongoing training programs related to self-care and protection principles are recommended.

Knowledge and practices of radiation safety among healthcare workers in Ismailia city hospitals, Egypt

“…In this study, the mean total score of correct answers regarding practice was 3.6 ± 4.1 representing 12% of the maximum score of 30. In the study of Alavi et al, (2017), it was mentioned that the mean practice score was 13.1± 3.3 accounting for 65.5% of the maximum score of 20. The difference between the two studies may be because the later study was performed in Saudi Arabia where there are available resources to afford the required radiation safety equipment [12] .…”

“…In the study of Alavi et al, (2017), it was mentioned that the mean practice score was 13.1± 3.3 accounting for 65.5% of the maximum score of 20. The difference between the two studies may be because the later study was performed in Saudi Arabia where there are available resources to afford the required radiation safety equipment [12] . On the other hand in Abdellah et al, (2015), the percentages of mean practice scores ranged from 35% -67% [7] .…”

“…For the part of the questionnaire that assess practice, each statement was measured on a three points Likert scale ranging from zero (Bad) to three (Adequate). The percent score will classify knowledge and practice into poor, moderate and good according to the study of Salih et al, (2014) and the study of Alavi et al, (2017) in which scores less than 50% were considered as poor, between 50% and 75% medium as and greater than 75% were considered as good [11,12] . Alavi et al, (2017) established a score for estimating knowledge, practice and attitude according to the Iranian academic grading (0-20) using the university's common 20-point grade scale.…”

“…Therefore, the minimum and maximum scores were 0 and 20, respectively, for each set of RP-KAP questions. Scores <10 were categorized as poor; 10-15 as medium, and ≥16 were defined as good scores [12] . Statistical significance was determined at 95% level of confidence (i.e.…”

Knowledge of radiation protection among radiology professionals and students: A medical college-based study

“…Several literature papers have also concluded a substantial need for radiographers to improve their awareness regarding radiation protection issues [ [24] , [25] , [26] ], greater emphasis should be given during study period [ [16] , [17] , [18] ]. In-service training for medical health workers should be provided with up-to-date study documents with adequate radiation protection training protocols and guidelines should be mandated [ 27 ]. Further work is required to justify the specific dose limits and the implementation of national protection legislation focusing on patient’s safety can be linked with radiography practice [ 26 ].…”