2021 AAPM Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Climate Survey Executive Summary.

PURPOSE: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) shares the results, conclusions, and recommendations from the initial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Climate Survey conducted in 2021. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The climate survey targeted medical physicists who are full members of the AAPM and included demographic inquiries and questions intended to assess the working environmental climate in terms of a sense of belonging and inclusion, experiences of discrimination and harassment, and obstacles to participation within the AAPM. The survey invitation was sent to 5,500 members. Responses were collected from 1385 members (response rate of 25%) between January and February 2021. RESULTS: Overall, the medical physics workplace climate was positive. However, some demographic and professional subgroups reported lower levels of agreement with positive characteristics of their workplace climates. Compared with men, women ranked lower 7 of 8 categories that characterized the workplace climate. Other subgroups that also ranked the workplace climate descriptors lower included individuals not originally from the United States and Canada (3/8). Most respondents strongly agreed/agreed that the climate within the AAPM was welcoming. However, 17% of respondents reported personally experiencing or witnessing microaggressions within the AAPM. Overall, medical physicists reported low levels of agreement that opportunities within the AAPM were available to them, from 34% to 60% among 8 categories, including opportunities to volunteer, join committees, and compete for leadership positions within the AAPM. Several subgroups reported even lower levels of agreement that these opportunities are available. Asian and Asian American respondents (3/8) and physicists with origins in countries outside the United States and Canada (7/8) reported fewer opportunities to participate in the AAPM. Medical physicists reported their experiences of discrimination and sexual harassment in their workplaces and within the AAPM. For those who reported personal experiences of sexual harassment, only 24% (15/63) felt comfortable reporting when it occurred within their workplaces, and 35% (9/26) felt comfortable reporting when it occurred within the AAPM. CONCLUSIONS: The report concludes with several recommendations for action.

Multi-institution consensus paper for acquisition of portable chest radiographs through glass barriers.

BACKGROUND: To conserve personal protective equipment (PPE) and reduce exposure to potentially infected COVID-19 patients, several Californian facilities independently implemented a method of acquiring portable chest radiographs through glass barriers that was originally developed by the University of Washington. METHODS: This work quantifies the transmission of radiation through a glass barrier using six radiographic systems at five facilities. Patient entrance air kerma (EAK) and effective dose were estimated both with and without the glass barrier. Beam penetrability and resulting exposure index (EI) and deviation index (DI) were measured and used to adjust the tube current-time product (mAs) for glass barriers. Because of beam hardening, the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was measured with image quality phantoms to ensure diagnostic integrity. Finally, scatter surveys were performed to assess staff radiation exposure both inside and outside the exam room. RESULTS: The glass barriers attenuated a mean of 61% of the normal X-ray beams. When the mAs was increased to match EI values, there was no discernible degradation of image quality as determined by the CNR. This was corroborated with subjective assessments of image quality by chest radiologists. The glass-hardened beams acted as a filter for low energy X-rays, and some facilities observed slight changes in patient effective doses. There was scattering from both the phantoms and the glass barriers within the room. CONCLUSIONS: Glass barriers require an approximate 2.5 times increase in beam intensity, with all other technique factors held constant. Further refinements are necessary for increased source-to-image distance and beam quality in order to adequately match EI values. This does not result in a significant increase in the radiation dose delivered to the patient. The use of lead aprons, mobile shields, and increased distance from scattering sources should be employed where practicable in order to keep staff radiation doses as low as reasonably achievable.

ACR Statement on Safe Resumption of Routine Radiology Care During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

The ACR recognizes that radiology practices are grappling with when and how to safely resume routine radiology care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although it is unclear how long the pandemic will last, it may persist for many months. Throughout this time, it will be important to perform safe, comprehensive, and effective care for patients with and patients without COVID-19, recognizing that asymptomatic transmission is common with this disease. Local idiosyncrasies prevent a single prescriptive strategy. However, general considerations can be applied to most practice environments. A comprehensive strategy will include consideration of local COVID-19 statistics; availability of personal protective equipment; local, state, and federal government mandates; institutional regulatory guidance; local safety measures; health care worker availability; patient and health care worker risk factors; factors specific to the indication(s) for radiology care; and examination or procedure acuity. An accurate risk-benefit analysis of postponing versus performing a given routine radiology examination or procedure often is not possible because of many unknown and complex factors. However, this is the overriding principle: If the risk of illness or death to a health care worker or patient from health care-acquired COVID-19 is greater than the risk of illness or death from delaying radiology care, the care should be delayed; however, if the opposite is true, the radiology care should proceed in a timely fashion.