No abstract available

[en] Short communication

[en] Purpose: The aim of this study was to establish a model of competence for newly qualified diagnostic radiographers which incorporated the notion of ‘fitness’ from the perspective of a number of key stakeholders. The research is published in two parts. Part 1, published in the last issue, described the background to the study, its methods and the results. Part 2 discusses the findings and considers the implications for professional practice and research. Methods: An expert panel was surveyed using the Delphi technique. The panel was asked to provide a statement that described the primary role of diagnostic radiographers and also to state the associated roles and responsibilities which would be expected of a new qualifier in their first post. In view of the lack of clarity concerning the expectations of new radiographers, a clear interpretation was needed on the term ‘first post’. In addition, the panel was asked to predict changes in the provision of health care and in society which may have an impact on the future role of radiographers. Results: A primary role statement was developed which placed more emphasis on the needs of the patient than on technology. The associated roles and responsibilities were named statements of competence and were organized into nine categories. Variations were noted in the interpretation of the term ‘first post’, with the majority of the panel agreeing that qualification and competence were not synonymous. The panel returned a wide range of predictions concerning the future role of radiographers, which, by the final round had been condensed to 33 statements. Conclusion: A model of competence was developed incorporating a range of knowledge, skills and attributes which could be used as a starting point for making judgements on the scope of practice: the range of roles and duties from which the competence of the newly qualified can be inferred. More than 50% of the competences could be classified as multiprofessional, lending support for the need to develop a curriculum which integrates the needs of a number of professional disciplines. The research highlighted that there are unclear boundaries around the area of qualification, in which new qualifiers continue to be supported. Regarding the future role, the panel predicted that changes in technology would have the most important impact and that the scope of practice for radiographers will continue to expand.

[en] Purpose: To identify the personal and professional development characteristics amongst a group of qualified radiographers, employed in the South West Region. Methods: A survey design was employed to explore the characteristics relating to personal and professional development. Group interviews were conducted with both diagnostic and therapeutic radiographers, employed in a part-time capacity, in four hospitals situated outside the South West Region. These interviews were analysed, and the emergent themes used to design a structured questionnaire. The Society of Radiographers’ database was used to access members in the South West Region. In February 1999, 926 questionnaires were administered via the post to access the target population of both full- and part-time members. Results: An overall response rate of 50% was obtained. Analysis of the questionnaires revealed that full-time radiographers spent more hours engaged in personal and professional development, and attended more study days, than their part-time counterparts. Furthermore, part-timers were more likely to opt for less formal courses than their full-time colleagues. A number of other personal and professional characteristics were also identified which would appear to be common to both full- and part-time practitioners. Conclusions: A proportion of radiographers employed in a part-time capacity are either not fully accessing the opportunities to become involved in personal and professional development, or these opportunities do not exist. Part-timers have unique personal and professional development requirements, and should therefore be considered separately to their full-time colleagues. Managers, radiographers and education providers should consider these findings in their quest for more effective continuing professional development.

[en] Aim: To explore the experience of the first consultant practitioners appointed; including the appointment process, nature of the role, their perceptions of success and challenges. Method: This was a whole population study of the known consultant radiographers appointed up to March 2005. It consisted of 3 phases. The first compared appointees job descriptions with the Department of Health guidance, the second collected contextual information using a questionnaire, and the third explored postholders experiences using telephone interviews. Results: Ten of the possible twelve appointees participated. All posts were established according to the guidelines, with largely similar job descriptions allowing for the different clinical specialist areas. All were very positive in their perceptions of their role, and faced similar challenges. They were strongest in their expert clinical practice working but had strong training and leadership roles. The number working at strategic level was low with limited research and few published papers, although there were notable exceptions. Conclusions: The first appointees demonstrated notable successes, strongest in the expert clinical practice element of roles, with evidence of team leadership, and involvement in training and education. Strategic engagement was disappointing, with little research being undertaken. Their experience was that the nature of consultancy was poorly understood by peers and medical colleagues.

[en] At DOE sites with more than one facility, and where RCT tasks at each facility may differ, site and facility tasks should be separated. The tasks that are common to all the facilities on the site should be included in Phase II training with the core tasks. Tasks unique to a facility should be added to the training program qualification standard, as an attachment, as Phase IV training. Not all the DOE sites will include Phase IV training in their programs. Phase IV training allows each site to qualify technicians to a select facility. Since the core training for the technicians is standardized, the transfer of technicians between facilities requires that only facility tasks be taught, provided the core qualification is current

No abstract available

[en] The purpose of this research was to assess (i) how confident Radiation Therapists (RTs) are in developing a series of plans that have increasing levels of difficulty, and (ii) the level of responsibility that they are willing to accept in relation to these treatments being implemented without the Radiation Oncologist (RO) reviewing or countersigning the plan. A self-administered questionnaire was designed around a set of six clinical planning scenarios demonstrating increasing levels of difficulty. Two hundred and three Radiation Therapists returned a completed questionnaire. All RTs indicated that they were confident to complete all the plans regardless of difficulty (p < 0.0001) except for newly qualified RTs in their first year of practice who indicated a lack of confidence with the most difficult case only. Contrary to the high levels of confidence, RTs overall were only willing to accept responsibility for implementing treatment for the two basic level scenarios (p < 0.0001). To gauge the clinical usefulness of this finding a clinical centre audit was conducted that indicated that basic level procedures account for around 30-40% of a department's workload. RTs indicated a number of issues as barriers to accepting responsibility for more advanced work.

[en] The concept of peer review for radiation therapists and medical dosimetrists has been studied very little in radiation oncology practice. The purpose of this manuscript is to analyze the concept of peer review in the clinical setting for both radiation therapists and medical dosimetrists. The literature reviewed both the percentages and causes of radiation therapy deviations. The results indicate that peer review can be both implemented and evaluated into both the radiation therapist and medical dosimetrist clinical practice patterns.

No abstract available