Cargando…
Ionising radiation (medical exposure) regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000 and their implications for Accident and Emergency (A&E) doctors in training.
With the introduction of the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000 (IRMER) the medical practitioner faces greater accountability when requesting radiological investigations. The referrer (usually a doctor or dentist) must supply sufficient medical data to justify...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ulster Medical Society
2001
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2449209/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11428319 |
Sumario: | With the introduction of the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000 (IRMER) the medical practitioner faces greater accountability when requesting radiological investigations. The referrer (usually a doctor or dentist) must supply sufficient medical data to justify radiation exposure to a patient. These regulations can lead to criminal prosecution if breached. Our objectives were to identify the level of unjustified requests for plain abdominal radiography among A&E doctors and whether there is a statistically significant difference in the justification of request between doctors of differing experience. We reviewed and prepared statistical analysis of 100 A&E request forms for plain abdominal radiography. Royal College of Radiologist Guidelines were used as a "Gold standard" for justification of the investigation. A&E doctors of less than six months experience are at greater risk of breaching these regulations when requesting plain abdominal films, when compared to more experienced doctors. This is a serious issue which should be addressed at undergraduate and pre-registration level in addition to ongoing audit. |
---|