A82 A SURVEY-BASED ASSESSMENT OF RADIATION PROTECTION ATTITUDES AND PRACTICES IN ADVANCED THERAPEUTIC ENDOSCOPY TRAINING CURRICULUMS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Fluoroscopy-assisted endoscopic procedures such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) expose patients and physicians to the risks of ionizing radiation, including infertility, cataracts, skin hypersensitivity, hair loss and cancer. Radiation exposure from these procedures can have lasting adverse effects on the health and productivity of gastroenterologists. With attention to “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) principles, recent efforts to minimize radiation use have emphasized the importance of formal radiation protection education, including during advanced therapeutic endoscopy (ATE) training. However, teaching of basic protective measures in radiation safety during ATE training remains often overlooked. Aims We aimed to learn how radiation safety training is delivered in ATE programs across Canada and the US. Identifying the existing training standards and knowledge will help us understand the current gaps in training curriculums and inform future curricular development. Methods Our study was reviewed by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board in September 2023. Surveys were designed and distributed with the REDCap software and sent to ATE trainees (current and recent graduates within the last 3 years) in Canada and Program Directors (PDs) of accredited ATE programs across Canada and the US. Results The survey was completed by 12 trainees and 4 PDs. These are preliminary results and further survey responses are being collected. The majority of trainees (75%) believed it would be very important for their program’s curriculum to include dedicated radiation safety teaching, but most trainees (83.3%) received no such training. Familiarity in optimizing modifiable fluoroscopy parameters to minimize radiation exposure (collimation, gain, magnification, frame rate modification or pulsed fluoroscopy) was variable among trainees (36.4%-81.8%). Seventy-five percent of trainees were unaware of the annual limit for radiation exposure and only 25% believed they were operating within a safe level. Most trainees (90.9%) felt they were given inadequate training to optimally reduce their risk of radiation exposure and 90.9% expressed a desire for further radiation safety training. Despite these findings, only 50% of PDs believed it would be beneficial to offer dedicated radiation safety training as part of their program’s curriculum. Among PDs, 75% did not feel their trainees had the knowledge required to reduce their risk of radiation exposure and all (100%) felt that dedicated training would be useful. Conclusions These findings indicate a need for more robust radiation safety training. Further studies are needed to understand the most effective way to deliver comprehensive radiation safety training to ATE trainees. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».