Inclusion of evidence and research in European radiography curricula

Alumni, radiographers, clinical placement tutors and industry insights about current radiographers practice, competences and autonomy in western Switzerland

INTRODUCTION

Radiographers' profession is constantly evolving, which demands adaptation of education and training programs to build up medical imaging and radiation therapy professionals (MIRTPs) that provide healthcare to improve patient experience and outcomes. This study aimed to map radiographers' practices, competences, and autonomy level in Western Switzerland.

METHODS

Data was collected by 2 cross-sectional online surveys targeting Alumni, radiographers, clinical placement tutors and medical imaging equipment specialists from industry, with opened and closed-end questions. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

81 Alumni and 93 Chief-Radiographers, clinical tutors, practitioner-radiographers and industry answered the questionnaires. The competences considered as the most "acquired or completely acquired" by the Alumni were: adopt a reflective posture on practice (90.1 %; 73/81), adopt ethical behaviour (90.1 %; 73/81), carrying out and providing radiological services for diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive purposes (81.5 %; 68/81), adapting communication to the other surrounding persons (81.5 %; 66/81), and check compliance of procedures with standards (69.1 %; 56/81). Similar results were referred by Employers. The autonomy of the participant radiographers was considered as average, and it focuses only the preparation of the patient and the protocol optimisation. The development and integration of research is weak as well as the application of competences regarding professionalism.

CONCLUSIONS

A better link between educational institutions and clinical practice can help on the integration of research and evidence-based on practice, necessary to progress the radiographers' profession in Western Switzerland. The autonomy needs to be further developed and leadership courses must be integrated in the curricula to facilitate the implementation of new approaches to reinforce radiographer's profession.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Practice must be revised to integrate evidence-based; to facilitate research development, the managers need to increase support.

Research ethics systems, processes, and awareness across Europe: Radiography research ethics standards for Europe (RRESFE)

INTRODUCTION

The Radiography Research Ethics Standards for Europe (RRESFE) project aims to provide a cross-sectional snapshot of current research ethics systems, processes, and awareness of such, across Europe together with identifying the associated challenges, education, and training needs.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey targeting radiography researchers in Europe was conducted. Data collection took place between April 26 and July 12, 2021, using a snowball sampling approach. Descriptive and analytical statistics were used to identify trends in research ethics frameworks across Europe.

RESULTS

285 responses were received across 33 European and 23 non-European countries. Most (n = 221; 95%) European respondents stated ethics approval is required before commencing research in their country. Requirements around research ethics approval and awareness of such requirements varied by European region (X² (2, n = 129) = 7.234, p = 0.013) and were found to differ depending on the type of research participant and study design. Additionally, European respondents reported ethics approval is a national requirement more often than their non-European counterparts (X² (1, n = 282) = 4.316, p = 0.049). Requirements for ethics approval were also associated with the undergraduate programme duration (2-year vs. 3-year vs. 3.5 year vs. 4-year vs. multiple programme durations; X² (4, n = 231) = 10.075, p = 0.016) and availability of postgraduate training (postgraduate training available vs. postgraduate training not available; X² (1, n = 231) = 15.448, p = <0.001) within respondents' country.

CONCLUSION

Respondents from countries with longer programme durations/availability of multiple programme lengths, availability of postgraduate training, and establishment of European Qualifications Framework Level 6 were generally associated with less uncertainty and more comprehensive research ethics requirements.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Results are informative of the current status of research ethics within evidence-based radiography.

Research ethics training, challenges, and suggested improvements across Europe: Radiography research ethics standards for Europe (RRESFE)

INTRODUCTION

The Radiography Research Ethics Standards for Europe (RRESFE) project aimed to provide a cross-sectional view of the current state of radiography research ethics across Europe. This included investigating education and training in research ethics, and identifying the key challenges and potential improvements associated with using existing research ethics frameworks.

METHODS

This cross-sectional online survey targeting radiography researchers in Europe was conducted between April 26 and July 12, 2021. Descriptive and analytical statistics were used to identify research ethics education and training trends. Content analysis of qualitative responses was employed to identify significant challenges and proposed improvements in research ethics frameworks of practice.

RESULTS

There were 232 responses received across 33 European countries. Most (n = 132; 57%) respondents had received some research ethics training; however, fewer participants had received training on safeguarding vulnerable patients (n = 72; 38%), diversity and inclusivity (n = 62; 33%), or research with healthy volunteers (n = 60; 32%). Training was associated with a greater perceived importance of the need for research ethics review (p = 0.031) and with the establishment of EQF Level 6 training (p = 0.038). The proportion of formally trained researchers also varied by region (p = <0.001). Time-to-ethics-approval was noted as the biggest challenge for professionals making research ethics applications.

CONCLUSION

Early and universal integration of research-oriented teaching within the radiography education framework which emphasises research ethics is recommended. Additionally, study findings suggest research ethics committee application and approval processes could be further simplified and streamlined.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The survey contributes to a growing body of knowledge surrounding the importance of education and training in research ethics for assuring a high standard of research outputs in Radiography and has identified hurdles to obtaining research ethics approval for further investigation and address.

Facilitators for and barriers to radiography research in public healthcare in Nordic countries

INTRODUCTION

It has been suggested that the future of diagnostic imaging relies on engagement in research and evidence-based practice. This implies a role transition from a clinical radiographer to a clinical radiographer-researcher. Clinical radiographers' stimuli for engaging in research in Nordic countries are unknown. This study aimed to address this gap.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data collection via an online questionnaire on facilitators for and barriers to participation in radiography research was carried out among 507 clinical radiographers in public healthcare in the Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.

RESULTS

Support from colleagues (odds ratio [OR] 2.62) and other professionals (OR 2.74), and self-esteem in research skills (OR ≥ 2.21), were facilitators for radiography research. Lack of knowledge and skills to conduct research (OR 2.48) was revealed to hinder radiographers' participation in research. The absence of a radiography research culture in the workplace explained non-participation in research (OR 1.75).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed significant factors for clinical radiographers' participation in research.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

A strategy for establishing a radiography research culture in healthcare is proposed that is novel for the context. Management support for knowledge development and activity leading to inter-professional research projects across knowledge fields, provision of a radiography research lead and acknowledgement of radiography research among colleagues signify the establishment of the culture. These prerequisites might provide a paradigm change towards not only the symbiosis of a clinical radiographer and an autonomous researcher but also a partner who adds radiography research to evidence-based practice in diagnostic imaging.

There's nothing plain about projection radiography! A discussion paper

OBJECTIVES

Unlike the technological advances in cross-sectional imaging, the adoption of CR and DR has been relatively overlooked in terms of the additional radiographer skills and competences required for optimal practice. Furthermore, projection radiography is often referred to as basic, plain or other words suggesting simplicity or entry-level skill requirements. Radiographers' professional identity is connected with the discourse expressed via the language used in daily practice and consequently, if the perception of projection radiography is regarded as simple practice not requiring much reflection or complex decision-making, apathy and carelessness may arise. The purpose of this narrative review was to raise projection radiography from its longstanding lowly place and re-position it as a specialist imaging field.

KEY FINDINGS

Danish pre-registration radiography curricula contain little mention of projection radiography and a low proportion (n = 17/144; 11.8%) of Danish radiography students chose to focus on projection radiography within publicly available BSc. theses between 2016 and 2020 as compared to topics related to CT and MRI (n = 60/144; 41.7%).

CONCLUSION

By changing how we as the profession perceive the role and position of projection radiography, we can start to rebuild its lost prestige and demand a greater, more detailed and clinically relevant educational offering from academic partners. For this to commence, the language and terminology we use to describe ourselves and tasks undertaken must reflect the complexity of the profession.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Regardless of imaging modality, every patient should be assured that a radiographer with expertise in acquiring images of diagnostic quality undertakes their examination. Reclaiming the prestige of projection radiography may lead students and radiographers to recognize projection radiography as a demanding specialist field for the benefit of the patients.

Evaluation of radiotherapy education across the EU and the impact on graduates' competencies working on the linear accelerator

INTRODUCTION

Regulation and education of the professionals administering radiotherapy treatments in the linear accelerator varies across the EU. However, how different programme characteristics affect the level of competency of these professionals has never been studied before. This study also aimed to assess which are the least and most developed competencies in radiotherapy across the EU.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was distributed to academic staff teaching radiotherapy across the EU. Staff were asked to identify the characteristics of the course programmes and to classify the level of competency of graduates regarding linear accelerator tasks.

RESULTS

Fifty respondents from 19 EU countries answered the questionnaire. The least developed competency theme was pharmacology followed by equipment quality assurance and management and leadership. The most developed competency was positioning and immobilisation, followed by radiotherapy treatment delivery and professional and ethical practice. Some competencies are developed at the same level across EU countries, while others vary considerably between member-states. Longer programmes, with more placements, and larger proportions of radiotherapy in the programme showed significant increase in the development of some competencies. Longer placements in skills labs was correlated with a decrease in competency.

CONCLUSION

There is no harmonisation of radiotherapy eduction across the EU and the differences in programme characteristics are reflected in differences in competency levels of radiotherapy radiographers. This may hinder movement of professionals and create disparities in the level of care offered across the EU.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Longer programmes, with longer clinical practice and adequate proportion of radiotherapy in the course are essential to ensure that these professionals are competent at similar levels across the EU and to ensure patient safety.