Medical Ethics in Radiography.

The medical field often requires radiologic technologists to make complex decisions that affect patients, employers, and colleagues. Technologists must consider practice standards when making choices, and also must act ethically to protect patients' safety and respect their autonomy. To make the most informed and ethical decisions, technologists should know the history of medical ethics, as well as be familiar with philosophical tools and ethical codes that can guide them in their daily practice.

Ionising radiation risk disclosure: When should radiographers assume a duty to inform?

INTRODUCTION: Autonomy is a fundamental patient right for ethical practice, and informed consent is the mechanism by which health care professionals ensure this right has been respected. The ethical notion of informed consent has evolved alongside legal developments. Under Australian law, a provider who fails to disclose risk may be found to be in breach of a duty of disclosure, potentially facing legal consequences if the patient experiences harm that is attributable to an undisclosed risk. These consequences may include the common law tort of negligence. Ionising radiation, in the form of a medical imaging examination, has the potential to cause harm. However, stochastic effects cannot be attributable to a specific ionising radiation event. What then is the role of the Australian medical imaging service provider in disclosing ionising radiation risk? METHODS: The ethical and legal principles of informed consent, and the duty of information provision to the patient are investigated. These general principles are then applied to the specific and unusual case of ionising radiation, and what responsibilities apply to the medical imaging provider. Finally, the legal, professional and ethical duties of the radiographer to disclose information to their patients are investigated. RESULTS: Australian law is unclear as to whether a radiographer has a common law responsibility to disclose radiation risk. There is ambiguity as to whether stochastic ionising radiation risk could be considered a legal disclosure responsibility. CONCLUSION: While it is unlikely that not disclosing risk will have medicolegal consequences, doing so represents sound ethical practice.

Patient-centered Radiation Safety.

Some suggest radiation safety is evolving from a provider-centered process to a more patient-centered approach. This shift places additional responsibility on radiologic technologists to educate patients about the possible risks and benefits of medical radiation exposure so patients can be equal partners in their care. This article discusses the ethics of radiation protection and the development of the patient-centered approach, and the radiologic technologist's role in ensuring patient-centered radiation safety is addressed.

Medical Ethics and Law in Radiologic Technology.

At every stage of their careers, radiologic technologists and student technologists must adhere to high ethical standards, obey the law, and consistently conduct themselves with professionalism. This article explains how modern health care ethics evolved, focusing on 8 important theorists. It also describes the ethical responsibilities of health care providers and the rights of patients. Important civil rights laws are discussed, focusing on the rights of health care workers as employees. A brief overview of the U.S. legal system follows, including the causes of action that most commonly involve health care professionals. Finally, this article discusses professionalism and its implications for radiologic technologists.

Stress management for the radiologic technologist.

Changes in technology in the radiology department and an emphasis on multitasking can lead to stress and burnout, along with the potential for medical errors. A shift in viewpoint and exercises in self-evaluation can help radiologic technologists learn to manage change in a positive manner. Learning to approach change through a series of transitions and positive steps can reduce stress at work and at home.

A review of ethics for the radiologic technologist.

Radiologic technology students learn ethical theory, ethical principles and the Code of Ethics. However, over time, the concepts may fade from the radiologic technologist's memory. Periodic review of the ethical concepts and the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists Standards of Ethics are important to maintain a clear understanding of ethical expectations of the radiologic technologist. This article provides examples of potential ethical violations to illustrate each principle in the Code of Ethics and each tenet in the Rules of Ethics. The examples are intended to help readers think about and relate to situations they may encounter. This article is a Directed Reading. Your access to Directed Reading quizzes for continuing education credit is determined by your CE preference. For access to other quizzes, go to www.asrt.org/store.

Fallacies in the arguments for new technology: the case of proton therapy.

In a seminal article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Søren Holm and Tuja Takala analysed two protechnology arguments in bioethics: the hopeful principle and the automatic escalator. They showed how these arguments relate to problematic arguments such as the precautionary principle and the empirical slippery slope argument, and argued that they should be used with great caution. The present article investigates the recent debate on proton beam therapy, where the hopeful principle and the automatic escalator are identified. However, the debate reveals a series of other arguments that deserve similar caution. An analysis of these arguments indicates that the roots of their fallacies are to be found in the ignorance of the uncertainties about risks and benefits and an overly optimistic attitude towards technology and progress. The point is not to argue against proton therapy, but rather to point out that flawed arguments for new technologies, such as proton therapy, can actually hamper their implementation instead of promoting it. Patients deserve the best technology available, not only on the basis of the best available evidence, but also on the basis of the best arguments.

[A cognitive approach to ethics in medical imaging]. / Une approche cognitive de l'éthique de l'acte d'imagerie médicale.

PURPOSE: To describe, with an ethical perspective, the information shared between patients, referring physicians, radiologists and technologists related to an imaging procedure to better understand the patients experiences based on the type of patient-provider relationship. METHODS: Cognitive diagrams were created to identify the different actors, their respective role, and the exchanges of information that will affect these roles at the time of examination. Then, the content of the shared information was studied relative to romanesque literature and semi-directed interviews with patients and imaging professionals. RESULTS: Ethical dysfunctions were observed. These are most frequently reported in the literature. But they were also observed in the field. In-depth evaluation are needed to obtain a better assessment of the current situation. CONCLUSION: Ethical concepts related to imaging studies are widely accepted. However, adhering to such concepts may not always be sufficient to ensure successful implementation. To achieve this objective, specific training based on accurate understanding of patients experiences will probably be required.

Linguistic and cultural competency.

The U.S. population is becoming more diverse and cultural and linguistic barriers may adversely affect the quality of health care for some individuals. Cultural and linguistic competencies are now a high priority for national health policy. Research commissioned by the American Society of Radiologic Technologists indicates that diversity among patients is a leading health care trend that will have an impact on radiologic technologists in the immediate future.

Radiologic technologists and ethical reasoning.

This study examines levels of ethical reasoning in students and practitioners in radiologic technology. Results of quantitative analysis revealed few differences in levels of postconventional ethical reasoning among 3 groups: beginning students, graduating students and practitioners 3 to 5 years postgraduation. There were, however, significant differences in 3 schemas of ethical reasoning based on the new Defining Issues Test (DIT2). This study suggests that integrating ethical instruction into the curriculum could have a positive effect on higher levels of postconventional reasoning in both students and graduates in radiologic technology.