by
Carol Ko, Staff Writer | April 08, 2013
From the April 2013 issue of HealthCare Business News magazine
Some doctors, however, think taking away badges for staff members who work around imaging should be off the table, period. “I’m shocked, to tell you the truth. This is a matter of safety for our personnel. It’s also a matter of patient safety,” says Valerie Jackson, director of radiology at Indiana University. “My level has been at zero for many years but I can’t imagine anyone working around imaging who wouldn’t want to be monitored.”
For the public, radiation’s close links with atomic bombs and apocalyptic fallout have always made it a touchy subject. Recall how panic over post-tsunami radiation exposure from Japan caused a backlog in radiation blocking potassium iodide pills on the West Coast.
Ad Statistics
Times Displayed: 909
Times Visited: 5 Fast-moving cardiac structures have a big impact on imaging. Fujifilm’s SCENARIA View premium performance CT brings solutions to address motion in Coronary CTA while delivering unique dose saving and workflow increasing benefits.
It’s no surprise that physicists often have a hard time reasoning with employees who may want to hold onto their badges whether or not they face valid exposure risks. “We do sometimes revisit the need for dosimetry for individuals, but it’s hard to get some to give it up,” says Jennifer E. Johnson, hospital health physicist at the University of Washington Health Center.
Because radiation exposure is invisible, many people feel more reassured when they’re able to see concrete evidence of its absence. Even when a badge is little more than a theoretical precaution, it’s often a source of extra comfort for many staffers to know that their readings continuously remain at zero.
“In that case, we could badge every member of the public,” says West. “Where do we stop?” While he acknowledges there are legitimate concerns around liability, he also thinks overbadging is the wrong way to address them. “Giving a radiation badge to someone who doesn’t need it is merely the appearance of safety versus true safety —- which is training staff to use the badges properly and making sure they’re being given to people who actually need them.”
West observes that even as many hospitals issue too many badges under the guise of safety, they also overlook real weaknesses in their radiation monitoring strategy, including inadequate badge training and late badge collection. “They could be spending that money and time on learning how to reduce dose,” he says.
For example, personnel who wear radiation badges outside their lead aprons may not be applying the correct adjustments to their badges to account for the lead apron, leading to inaccurate readings. Many hospitals often collect badges three to four months late. Time is of the essence when it comes to badge collection, since it becomes nearly impossible to understand why or how unusually high exposures occurred the longer hospitals wait to read badges. “In those cases, there is no value in badging,” says West.
