Cargando…

National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia

INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy (RT), like many allied health professions, has lacked professional practice clarity, which until 2008 had not been comprehensively investigated. This manuscript describes the first phase of a three‐phase project investigating the current and future practices of radiat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sale, Charlotte, Halkett, Georgia, Cox, Jenny
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4914814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350890
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.155
_version_ 1782438595513024512
author Sale, Charlotte
Halkett, Georgia
Cox, Jenny
author_facet Sale, Charlotte
Halkett, Georgia
Cox, Jenny
author_sort Sale, Charlotte
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy (RT), like many allied health professions, has lacked professional practice clarity, which until 2008 had not been comprehensively investigated. This manuscript describes the first phase of a three‐phase project investigating the current and future practices of radiation therapists (RTs) in Australia. The aim of phase 1 was to define the practice of RTs in Australia. METHODS: A quantitative approach was used to gain an understanding of RT practice. A national survey was distributed to RTs in Australia. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to analyse the data. RT practice was analysed in relation to core and non‐core roles, where non‐core roles were further divided into basic and advanced practices. RESULTS: The data from the national survey were representative of the Australian RT population (n = 525). The current practice of RTs is presented in summary tables for each area of work (treatment, planning, simulation, mould room and general). CONCLUSION: This study provided clarification of RT practice and indicated there was a desire to relinquish administrative roles to focus on RT–specific practice. There was evidence that some advanced roles were currently practiced in Australia; however, there was no structure to support these roles and they were based only on local need. This study identified that the profession needs to consider how they will maintain core RT practice, while encouraging the development of new roles, and whether some roles need to be relinquished.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4914814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49148142016-06-27 National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia Sale, Charlotte Halkett, Georgia Cox, Jenny J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy (RT), like many allied health professions, has lacked professional practice clarity, which until 2008 had not been comprehensively investigated. This manuscript describes the first phase of a three‐phase project investigating the current and future practices of radiation therapists (RTs) in Australia. The aim of phase 1 was to define the practice of RTs in Australia. METHODS: A quantitative approach was used to gain an understanding of RT practice. A national survey was distributed to RTs in Australia. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to analyse the data. RT practice was analysed in relation to core and non‐core roles, where non‐core roles were further divided into basic and advanced practices. RESULTS: The data from the national survey were representative of the Australian RT population (n = 525). The current practice of RTs is presented in summary tables for each area of work (treatment, planning, simulation, mould room and general). CONCLUSION: This study provided clarification of RT practice and indicated there was a desire to relinquish administrative roles to focus on RT–specific practice. There was evidence that some advanced roles were currently practiced in Australia; however, there was no structure to support these roles and they were based only on local need. This study identified that the profession needs to consider how they will maintain core RT practice, while encouraging the development of new roles, and whether some roles need to be relinquished. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-01-07 2016-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4914814/ /pubmed/27350890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.155 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Institute of Radiography and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Sale, Charlotte
Halkett, Georgia
Cox, Jenny
National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia
title National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia
title_full National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia
title_fullStr National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia
title_full_unstemmed National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia
title_short National survey on the practice of radiation therapists in Australia
title_sort national survey on the practice of radiation therapists in australia
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4914814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27350890
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.155
work_keys_str_mv AT salecharlotte nationalsurveyonthepracticeofradiationtherapistsinaustralia
AT halkettgeorgia nationalsurveyonthepracticeofradiationtherapistsinaustralia
AT coxjenny nationalsurveyonthepracticeofradiationtherapistsinaustralia