| Literature DB >> 31073803 |
.
Abstract
The recently implemented European Council Basic Safety and Standards Directive (BSSD), 2013/59/Euratom lays down core radiation protection standards for European radiology departments, with a mandatory requirement for supporting clinical audit processes.A survey on behalf of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) was undertaken in November 2018 involving the ESR EuroSafe Imaging Star department network to assess compliance with selected key BSSD requirements, with emphasis also on clinical audit/re-audit.64% of invited departments participated and the survey results revealed a lack of compliance with BSSD requirements even when allowing for work in progress within departments. Justification processes showed the lowest rates of compliance overall, with varying results relating to dose limits, patient information and significant accidental exposure notification. Questions around implementation of diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) revealed generally far higher compliance with requirements.The survey findings confirm a lack of compliance with key BSSD radiation protection indicators and also a lack of supporting clinical audit structures. These findings are likely to be representative of the wider radiological community in Europe. There is a need for a co-ordinated response, involving relevant European agencies, national bodies and societies and also individual radiology departments to address these issues. ESR publications on clinical audit (Esperanto) and the 2018 EuroSafe Imaging Call for Action will be important components of this response.Entities:
Keywords: 2013/59/Euratom; Basic Safety Standards Directive (BSSD); Clinical audit; Clinical governance; Radiation protection; Radiology
Year: 2019 PMID: 31073803 PMCID: PMC6509314 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-019-0734-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Insights Imaging ISSN: 1869-4101
Pilot Survey on uptake of European BSS Directive (2013/59 Euratom) requirements with particular focus on clinical audit in European radiology departments
| Question | A written information process is available for the referrer | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Written process informing key individuals/agencies of the exposure and subsequent analysis in the event of a significant accidental radiation exposure | |||||
| Yes | No | Sometimes | Answered | Skipped | |
| 26 (50.00%) | 13 (25.00%) | 13 (25.00%) | 52 | 14 | |
| the practitioner | |||||
| Yes | No | Sometimes | Answered | Skipped | |
| 43 (84.31%) | 7 (13.73%) | 1 (1.96%) | 51 | 15 | |
| the patient (or their representative) | |||||
| Yes | No | Sometimes | Answered | Skipped | |
| 35 (64.81%) | 11 (20.37%) | 8 (14.81%) | 54 | 12 | |
| the radiation protection competent authority | |||||
| Yes | No | Sometimes | Answered | Skipped | |
| 45 (76.27%) | 11 (18.64%) | 3 (5.08%) | 59 | 7 | |
| Does your department have a programme in place to audit this requirement? | |||||
| Yes | No | In development | Answered | Skipped | |
| 46 (82.14%) | 8 (14.29%) | 2 (3.57%) | 56 | 10 | |
| Is a regular re-audit carried out or planned? | |||||
| Yes | No | In development | Answered | Skipped | |
| 45 (80.36%) | 7 (12.50%) | 4 (7.14%) | 56 | 10 | |
Pilot Survey on uptake of European BSS Directive (2013/59 Euratom) requirements with particular focus on clinical audit in European radiology departments
| DRLs - Diagnostic Reference Levels | Has this requirement been implemented in your department? | Does your department have a programme in place to audit this requirement? | Is a regular re-audit carried out or planned? | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | In development | N/A (no DRLs in place or planned) | Answered | Skipped | Yes | No | In development | N/A (no DRLs in place or planned) | Answered | Skipped | Yes | No | In development | Answered | Skipped | |
| DRLs established for typical radiodiagnostic examinations (X-ray) | 49 (81.67%) | 8 (13.33%) | 3 (5.00%) | 60 | 6 | 45 (88.24%) | 4 (7.84%) | 2 (3.92%) | 51 | 15 | 45 (88.24%) | 4 (7.84%) | 2 (3.92%) | 51 | 15 | ||
| DRLs established for high-dose radiodiagnostic examinations (interventional radiology/CT) | 57 (95.00%) | 1 (1.67%) | 2 (3.33%) | 60 | 6 | 55 (93.22%) | 3 (5.08%) | 1 (1.69%) | 59 | 7 | 54 (91.53%) | 3 (5.08%) | 2 (3.39%) | 59 | 7 | ||
| Consistency of DRLs in use in your department with current European recommendations (where available, note recent publication of paediatric DRLs) | 49 (81.67%) | 3 (5.00%) | 7 (11.67%) | 1 (1.67%) | 60 | 6 | 49 (90.74%) | 2 (3.70%) | 3 (5.56%) | 0 | 54 | 12 | 47 (87.04%) | 3 (5.56%) | 4 (7.41%) | 54 | 12 |
| Regular review of DRLs | 54 (90.00%) | 1 (1.67%) | 4 (6.67%) | 1 (1.67%) | 60 | 6 | 48 (82.76%) | 4 (6.90%) | 6 (10.34%) | 0 | 58 | 8 | 48 (82.76%) | 4 (6.90%) | 6 (10.34%) | 58 | 8 |
| Procedures for local review where DRLs consistently exceed recommendations and where corrective action is taken | 51 (85.00%) | 1 (1.67%) | 8 (13.33%) | 60 | 6 | 48 (82.76%) | 3 (5.17%) | 7 (12.07%) | 0 | 58 | 8 | 47 (81.03%) | 5 (8.62%) | 6 (10.34%) | 58 | 8 | |
Pilot Survey on uptake of European BSS Directive (2013/59 Euratom) requirements with particular focus on clinical audit in European radiology departments
| Country | Responding EuroSafe Star Departments by country | Total no. of EuroSafe Imaging Star Departments by country |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | 1 | 1 |
| Belgium | 2 | 2 |
| Bulgaria | 1 | 1 |
| Croatia | 1 | 1 |
| Czech Republic | 0 | 1 |
| Finland | 0 | 1 |
| France | 3 | 3 |
| Germany | 2 | 4 |
| Greece | 2 | 4 |
| Hungary | 8 | 8 |
| Ireland | 3 | 6 |
| Italy | 8 | 14 |
| Lithuania | 1 | 1 |
| Poland | 5 | 7 |
| Portugal | 7 | 7 |
| Romania | 1 | 1 |
| Spain | 3 | 3 |
| Sweden | 1 | 1 |
| Switzerland | 13 | 22 |
| The Netherlands | 2 | 2 |
| Turkey | 2 | 13 |
| 66 | 103 |