OBJECTIVES: The Radiation Protection of Patients Unit of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is concerned about the effectiveness of justification of diagnostic medical exposures. Recent published work and the report of an initial IAEA consultation in the area gave grounds for such concerns. There is a significant level of inappropriate usage, and, in some cases, a poor level of awareness of dose and risk among some key groups involved. This article aims to address this. METHODS: The IAEA convened a second group of experts in November 2008 to review practical and achievable actions that might lead to more effective justification. RESULTS: This report summarises the matters that this group considered and the outcome of their deliberations. There is a need for improved communication, both within professions and between professionals on one hand, and between professionals and the patients/public on the other. Coupled with this, the issue of consent to imaging procedures was revisited. The need for good evidence-based referral guidelines or criteria of acceptability was emphasised, as was the need for their global adaptation and dissemination. CONCLUSION: Clinical audit was regarded as a key tool in ensuring that justification becomes an effective, transparent and accountable part of normal radiological practice. In summary, justification would be facilitated by the "3 As": awareness, appropriateness and audit.
OBJECTIVES: The Radiation Protection of Patients Unit of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is concerned about the effectiveness of justification of diagnostic medical exposures. Recent published work and the report of an initial IAEA consultation in the area gave grounds for such concerns. There is a significant level of inappropriate usage, and, in some cases, a poor level of awareness of dose and risk among some key groups involved. This article aims to address this. METHODS: The IAEA convened a second group of experts in November 2008 to review practical and achievable actions that might lead to more effective justification. RESULTS: This report summarises the matters that this group considered and the outcome of their deliberations. There is a need for improved communication, both within professions and between professionals on one hand, and between professionals and the patients/public on the other. Coupled with this, the issue of consent to imaging procedures was revisited. The need for good evidence-based referral guidelines or criteria of acceptability was emphasised, as was the need for their global adaptation and dissemination. CONCLUSION: Clinical audit was regarded as a key tool in ensuring that justification becomes an effective, transparent and accountable part of normal radiological practice. In summary, justification would be facilitated by the "3 As": awareness, appropriateness and audit.
Authors: Ch Triantopoulou; I Tsalafoutas; P Maniatis; D Papavdis; G Raios; I Siafas; S Velonakis; E Koulentianos Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Andrea Pola; Daniela Corbella; Andrea Righini; Alberto Torresin; Paola E Colombo; Luigi Vismara; Luca Trombetta; Michele Maddalo; Maria Vittoria Introini; Daniela Tinelli; Laura Strohmenger; Giovanna Garattini; Angelica Munari; Fabio Triulzi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-01-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Isabelle R Miousse; Marie-Cecile G Chalbot; Annie Lumen; Alesia Ferguson; Ilias G Kavouras; Igor Koturbash Journal: Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 5.657