What are the perceptions of women towards transvaginal sonographic examinations?

Patient understanding of diagnostic ultrasound examinations in an Australian private radiology clinic

Purpose

To determine patient understanding and expectations of ultrasound imaging and its safety, sources of examination information and levels of examination anxiety.

Methods

1070 consecutive patients presenting to a private, regional radiology practice in New South Wales, Australia between 16^th May and 14^th June 2019, were invited to complete a survey while waiting for their non-interventional ultrasound examination. The survey included questions on demographic characteristics, knowledge such as examination risks and safety, ultrasound expectations such as dissemination of results, sources of examination information and levels of participant anxiety. Data were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis tests (SPSS v. 25) to determine statistical associations between participant demographic factors, knowledge, anxiety level and the main source of examination information.

Results

A total of 215/1070 (20%) patients voluntarily participated in the study. Most were female (74%, 159/215), with a median (range) age of 55 (18-92) years. Participant's median (range) score of ultrasound imaging knowledge was 3 (0-5) scored out of six and indicated uncertainty regarding the ultrasound procedure, result dissemination and ultrasound safety. Participants with previous personal experience had significantly higher levels of ultrasound imaging knowledge than those whose primary information source was their referring doctor (P = 0.0005) or the internet (P = 0.026). Significantly higher levels of ultrasound examination knowledge were also associated with lower self-reported levels of anxiety (P = 0.002).

Conclusion

Participants had incomplete ultrasound examination knowledge, including misconceptions regarding safety and result dissemination, some of which could be clarified by the sonographer at the beginning of the ultrasound examination.

Regulation of healthcare and medical imaging in Australia: A narrative review of the evolution, function and impact on professional behaviours

OBJECTIVES

This review explores the literature about the status and influence of statutory regulation in healthcare with a focus on medical imaging. It summarises the status of regulation in Australia for radiographers and sonographers, with brief reference to the global situation. The role of regulation is explored in terms of its evolution, function and effect on professional behaviours.

KEY FINDINGS

Reports of medical errors, sentinel events and professional misconduct in healthcare have raised concern about how health care professionals are regulated. Patient-centric healthcare delivery has changed how people interact with healthcare, contributing to the development of statutory regulation for many healthcare professions. In Australia, the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (The National Law) 2009, established the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (NRAS) in order to practice. Not all health care professions are included in the scheme. In medical imaging, radiographers are included but sonographers are a notable exception. Regulation is designed to positively influence practitioners' professional behaviours. The available evidence however is limited, but suggests that under certain circumstances, it can negatively impact practitioners' professional behaviours.

CONCLUSION

Statutory regulation has been implemented to address serious issues highlighted in reports of medical errors and professional misconduct, but it may have unintended consequences on the professional behaviours of practitioners. Limited research means the relationship between statutory regulation of healthcare practitioners and its impact upon professional behaviours remains unclear.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

If statutory regulation of healthcare professionals is to achieve its aim of protecting the public, it is imperative that we understand the impact that it has on professional behaviours. This review highlights that it can negatively impact professional behaviours which may be detrimental to patient's safety.