Evaluation of the quality and impact of online learning through the SAFE EUROPE webinars.

INTRODUCTION: The SAFE EUROPE project, a European-funded project, addressed educational gaps of Therapeutic Radiographers/Radiation Therapists (TR/RTTs) by offering a series of free webinars. This study aimed to assess the quality of these webinars and their impact on professional practice. METHODS: Data collection involved two methods: an automated feedback form administered after each webinar, supplemented by a survey disseminated through social media. The collected data encompassed attendance statistics, participants' professions and geographic locations, webinar quality assessment, the acquisition of new knowledge and skills, the application of this newfound knowledge in practice, and the likelihood of recommending these webinars. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to analyse the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Ethical approval for the study was obtained. RESULTS: 11,286 individuals from 107 countries participated in 18 webinars. Despite 72.7% being radiographers, a diverse array of professionals attended the webinars, including medical physicists, oncologists, radiologists, and academics. Remarkably, 98.7% of respondents rated the webinar quality as either good or excellent. The average rating for the likelihood of recommending these webinars to colleagues was 8.96/10. A substantial proportion of respondents expressed agreement or strong agreement that the webinars enhanced their knowledge (85%) and skills (73%). Furthermore, 79% of participants indicated that the webinars motivated them to change practice, with 65% having already implemented these changes. The insights from open-ended questions corroborated these findings. CONCLUSION: The webinars effectively achieved the aim of the SAFE EUROPE project to enhance practice by increasing knowledge and skills. Participants overwhelmingly endorsed the quality of these webinars. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Webinars represent a cost-efficient training tool that reaches a global audience and various radiography/radiotherapy professions. The development of additional webinars is strongly recommended.

Radiography students' viewpoints of the clinical learning environment: A cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: The quality of clinical learning environments (CLEs) impact learners' experience and competence development. Objective instruments have been developed to evaluate CLEs from the perspective of medical and nursing students. No such instruments have been used in Radiography. METHODS: Radiography students' perspectives of CLEs were investigated using the validated Undergraduate Clinical Education Environment Measure (UCEEM). Undergraduate (UG) (n = 365) and graduate entry (GE) radiography students (n = 45) from an Irish university were invited to participate. CLEs consisted of 25 public and 10 private hospitals. The UCEEM contains 26 items under two overarching dimensions, experiential learning and social participation, with four subscales: opportunities to learn in and through work and quality of supervision; preparedness for student entry; workplace interaction patterns and student inclusion; and equal treatment. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten students participated (response rate 52.4%; n = 185 UG, n = 30 GE), most of whom were based in public hospitals (87.4%). The mean UCEEM score was 107.5 ± 17.7 (optimal range: 90-125). Experiential learning and social participation were scored 74.2 ± 12.5 (optimal range: 60-85) and 33.37 ± 6.29 (optimal range: 30-40), respectively. Private hospitals ranked slightly higher than public hospitals for 'opportunities to learn in and through work and quality of supervision' (p = 0.018). Items ranked highest related to 'equal treatment' and 'opportunity to put theory into practice'. Clinical supervision-related items were scored highest by first-year students. CONCLUSION: High UCEEM scores indicate radiography students' positive perceptions of their CLEs, particularly regarding equality and experiential learning. Findings support the expansion of radiography placement to include public and private hospitals. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The UCEEM is a theoretically robust, validated tool which appears suitable for evaluating radiography CLEs. This study provides valuable baseline data for comparison of Radiography CLEs.

An investigation into academic career pathways across Radiography education centres internationally.

INTRODUCTION: Robust academic pathways are critical to support of radiography faculty within third level education. As the profession of Radiography grows its' research activity, it is important that academic opportunities meet the needs of the profession. The purpose of this research was to investigate current academic career pathways across radiography education centres internationally. METHODS: An online survey was developed and administered to radiography academics and clinical/academic staff members internationally. The survey questions (n = 28) include demographic data; teaching and research requirements; academic promotion criteria; identification of the challenges and benefits of being an academic, including equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) matters. RESULTS: A total of 175 responses were obtained (6 continents and 39 countries), with a variety of experience levels amongst academics that primarily held permanent work contracts. Regarding the highest qualifications held, 31.4% (n = 55) had a Doctorate and 45.7% (n = 80) a Master's degree, and most respondents were employed as academic lecturers (40.6%; n = 71), with 17.7% (n = 31) employed at professorial level. The minimum time requirement to achieve a permanent contract was variable, ranging from no delay (5.7%; n = 10) to more than 10 years (12.6%; n = 22). Doctorate qualification is currently not necessary in order to career progression for 126 (72%) respondents, while 52% (n = 91) provided specific research requirements. 106 (60.6%) respondents indicated that their institution has EDI policy. CONCLUSION: This study has captured details related to academic pathways across international radiography education centres. Whilst some heterogeneity exists, there are numerous differences impacting standardised academic career opportunities for Radiography academics. These may challenge academic career opportunities and discourage those interested in an academic career. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The profile and educational background of these academics has been highlighted as well as the perceived barriers and advantages of a career in academic.

Radiography education in 2022 and beyond - Writing the history of the present: A narrative review.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic had a major effect on teaching and learning. This study aimed to describe a range of teaching, learning, and assessment strategies related to radiography education which have become more common due to the pandemic through a narrative literature review. KEY FINDINGS: Educational change in radiography was accelerated by the disruption caused by the pandemic. Changes included the site and mode of teaching and conducting of assessment. While some of the digital transformation trends were introduced before the pandemic, others were further amplified during this period of time. Alternative solutions such as virtual reality technology, gamification, and technology-enhanced learning were especially salient and have the potential to mitigate challenges brought about by the pandemic. The use of technology in the clinical setting, in assessment, and to facilitate feedback, are important tools for improving learners' clinical skills performance. Collectively, these digital technologies can maximise learning and support mastery of knowledge, skills and attitudes. CONCLUSION: The pandemic has cast a new light on existing methodologies and pedagogies in education. This review suggests that digital technology is shaping teaching and learning within radiography education and also that educators cannot ignore this digital shift. With the digital trajectory, it would be highly useful to transform approaches to education within radiography to support learning as radiography education moves towards the new normal era. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Digital technology in education can help improve the learning experience for learners but educators need to be equipped with the technological skills and be adaptable to these changes. Continual sharing of experiences and knowledge among radiography educators is essential. Safety nets need to be in place to ensure digital inclusiveness and that no learner gets left behind due to the digital divide in education.

The challenges, coping mechanisms, and recovery from the initial waves of the COVID-19 pandemic among academic radiographers.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic arrived in Europe in March 2020 and created major challenges across healthcare provision and for healthcare education programmes as well as having a major impact on society. Within the profession of Radiography changes in medical imaging, radiotherapy, and teaching practices have been reported along with the negative impact on radiographers and students. The aim of this study was to investigate key challenges relating to academic practice during the COIVD-19 pandemic; how radiography academics have coped and to identify recommendations for further support required to facilitate recovery of the academic faculty as the pandemic ebbs. METHODS: A survey was circulated using SurveyMonkey™ via personal, national and international networks, including the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS), to reach as many academic radiographers as possible. Open questions relating to the challenges of providing radiography education during the COVID-19 pandemic and the and coping strategies used were included. Thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo (QSR International, MA). RESULTS: 533 academic radiographers responded to the whole survey from 43 different countries, with 340 responses relating to challenges and 327 for coping strategies. The main themes for the challenges were clinical practice, communication with colleagues, lack of face to face, managing change, students (support), and staff support. The coping strategy themes were communication with colleagues, physical exercise, self-care and wellbeing. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate a multitude of challenges for academic radiographers and the pressure they worked under during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic was clear. However, the majority employed healthy coping strategies to help them deal with the pressure, uncertainty and trauma of the situation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: COVID-19 had a significant impact on academic radiographers and while many reported good strategies for coping, the level of pressure is unsustainable. This study highlights the need to support academic radiographers to ensure a sustainable workforce.

The risk of burnout in academic radiographers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic created major challenges across society, healthcare provision and also for those delivering healthcare education programmes. Clinical placements were disrupted and, in many incidences cancelled. Higher education institutions were required to move completely to online delivery methods with little notice. This created significant additional workload, stress and the need to learn new skills at a time of great uncertainty. This study explored the risks of burnout in academic radiographers during the first 12 months of the pandemic. METHODS: A survey was circulated using SurveyMonkey™ via personal, national and international networks, including the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS), to reach as many academic radiographers as possible. Disengagement and exhaustion were measured using the Oldenburg burnout inventory. Descriptive statistics and a one-way ANOVA were used to analyse the quantitative data using STATA V16 (Statacorp, TA). RESULTS: 533 academic radiographers responded to the survey from 43 different countries. Mean disengagement was in the medium range and exhaustion was high for the total dataset. In a subset of countries with 10 or more responses, there was significant variation between countries, with the UK having highest mean exhaustion score and the UK, Ireland and France sharing the highest mean disengagement score. In the total dataset, 86% agreed workload had increased during the pandemic and 35% had considered leaving academia in the last year. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate the stark reality of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on academic radiographers' workload, wellbeing, and intention to leave their roles. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: COVID-19 has had a significant impact on academic radiographers and this study highlights the urgent need for remedial measures to better support academic radiographers in order to ensure a sufficient, and sustainable workforce.

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.

The impact of COVID-19 upon student radiographers and clinical training in Latin America.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to identify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon radiography education across Latin American countries. METHODS: A survey containing 20 questions was circulated to radiography students, across 13 universities in 11 countries of Latin America using Google Forms. The survey contained open and closed questions. Answers were analysed with descriptive statistics and the methodology of interpretative phenomenological analysis for the open answers. RESULTS: Of the 1310 responses only 23.9% (n = 313) of students reported attending clinical placements and from this cohort only 8.9% (n = 28) became infected with COVID-19. In response to how the pandemic had impacted upon the students' academic progression, the most common topic in the open answers was "Concerns about the lack of clinical training", mentioned by 629 students. Students in middle and later years of their radiography education expressed the greatest concern about future clinical placements. Almost all radiography students (95.2%/n = 1247) indicated that their main concerns regarding COVID-19 infection while undertaking clinical placements was in relation to the risk of infecting their families as most students stated they cohabited with relatives (86.6%/n = 1134). CONCLUSION: Compared to European findings co-habitation trends increased anxiety related to infection and impacted their mental health. Students expressed concern about the quality of education they were receiving during the pandemic and access to resources to facilitate on-line learning was inadequate. Socio-economic and internet connectivity factors specific to Latin America were identified and these issues need to be addressed if on-line education is required in the future. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted Latin America and this study identifies the implications for radiography students related to their clinical and academic training and highlights factors which require consideration to support radiography students as the pandemic continues.

THE EFFECTS OF CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IMAGING GUIDANCE ON PATIENT RADIATION EXPOSURES IN TRANS-ARTERIAL CHEMOEMBOLISATION FOR HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA.

This study investigated the effects of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) guidance in trans-arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) procedures on the number of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) runs acquired and total patient radiation exposure in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A retrospective, analytical cross-sectional, single institution, study was conducted. Dose data were compared across the control (DSA guidance alone) and study (DSA and CBCT guidance) groups. A total of 122 procedures were included within the study. There was a significant reduction in the number of DSA runs (3 vs 5, p < 0.001) and DSA air kerma-area product (PKA) (3077.3 vs 4276.6 µGym2, p = 0.042) for the study group when compared to the control group. Total procedural PKA and total procedural reference air kerma (Ka,r) were shown to be 50 and 73% higher, respectively, for the study group when compared to the control group. CBCT imaging guidance does reduce the number of DSA runs and DSA PKA required to complete the TACE procedure for patients diagnosed with HCC; however, a substantial increase in total procedural PKA is to be expected and it is thus important that this increased dose is carefully considered and justified.

Autism-friendly MRI: Improving radiography practice in the UK, a survey of radiographer practitioners.

INTRODUCTION: Autistic individuals undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations may face significant challenges, mainly due to sensory overload and MRI environment-related limitations. This study aimed to explore radiographers' perspectives and experiences regarding MRI scanning of autistic individuals. METHODS: Data collection was achieved using a specifically designed mixed methods questionnaire on Qualtrics. The snowball technique was used. This UK-wide survey was electronically distributed by three main recruitment agencies between December 2020 and February 2021. RESULTS: 130 valid responses were received. A lack of relevant training and knowledge related to autism was noted. Effective communication, optimisation and customisation of the MRI examination, and MRI environment adjustments facilitated the completion of a safe and effective MRI examination. Poor patient-radiographer communication, unavailability of Special Educational Needs (SEN) experts, lack of specialised radiographer training and lack of specific guidelines were identified as the main barriers to successful MRI examinations. CONCLUSION: Although routine MRI safety and patient care rules will apply, MRI scanning of autistic individuals requires customisation and reasonable adjustments in communication, environment, and training of clinical teams. In addition, guidelines should be established to be used as a reference point to improve clinical practice. The adjustments proposed by radiographers were all consistent with the interventions in the wider literature. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: MRI practice for personalised care of autistic individuals should be aligned with current evidence, to customise communication and offer workflow and environmental adjustments. Formal training related to autism, integrated within radiography academic curricula and better co-ordination and communication of interdisciplinary teams would provide the necessary skill mix to deliver safe, high quality MRI scans with optimal experience for autistic service users and their carer(s).

Artificial intelligence: The opinions of radiographers and radiation therapists in Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into medical imaging is much debated. Diagnostic Radiographers (DRs) and Radiation Therapists (RTTs) are at the forefront of this technological leap, thus an understanding of their views, in particular changes to their current roles, is key to safe, optimal implementation. METHODS: An online survey was designed, including themes: role changes, clinical priorities for AI, patient benefits, and education. It was distributed nationally in the Republic of Ireland via the national professional body, clinical management, and social media. RESULTS: 318 DRs and 77 RTTs participated. Priority areas for development included quality assurance, clinical audit, radiation dose optimisation, and improved workflow for DRs and treatment planning algorithm optimisation, clinical audit, and post processing for RTTs. There was resistance regarding AI use for patient facing roles and final image interpretation. 27.6% of DRs and 40.3% of RTTs currently use AI clinically and 46.1% of DRs and 41.2% of RTTs anticipate reduced staffing levels with AI. 64.9% of DRs and 70.6% of RTTs felt AI will be positive for patients, with the majority promoting AI regulation through national legislation. 86.1% of DRs and 94.0% of RTTs were favourable to AI implementation. CONCLUSION: This research identifies priority AI development and implementation areas for DRs and RTTs. It thus highlights that DRs and RTTs should be involved in development of AI tools that would best support practice, and that clearly defined pathways for AI implementation into these key professions requires discussion so that optimum use and patient safety can ensue. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Understanding opinions of AI has significant implications for practice, for ensuring optimal product development, implementation, and training, together with planning for potential DR and RTT role changes.