Radiation awareness in an Italian multispecialist sample assessed with a web-based survey

Abstract Introduction The awareness of radiation doses and risks, also during interventional cardiology procedures, is essential today in order to apply the risk-benefit assessment and to reinforce the principles of justification and optimisation in clinical practice. Methods A voluntary survey with 10 questions and multiple-choice answers was run on a popular cardiology website (www.cardiolink.it) independently by a scientific publisher, in order to evaluate the contemporary level of radiation awareness in a multi-speciality sample of physicians in Italy. Results One thousand eight hundred and sixty-one physicians completed the test. The survey showed good results since both prescribers and practitioners (mostly cardiologists) working in Italy are largely aware of the cancer and non-cancer risks of medical radiation use, regardless of their subspecialty background. Conclusion Physicians are largely aware of the cancer and non-cancer risks of medical radiation use, regardless of their subspecialty background. However, there is still broad space for improvement; in the future, the awareness of radiation risk is a prerequisite to create a culture of respect for radiation hazard and a commitment to minimise exposure and maximise protection.

[1]  G. Raff,et al.  2018 ACC/HRS/NASCI/SCAI/SCCT Expert Consensus Document on Optimal Use of Ionizing Radiation in Cardiovascular Imaging-Best Practices for Safety and Effectiveness, Part 2: Radiological Equipment Operation, Dose-Sparing Methodologies, Patient and Medical Personnel Protection: A Report of the American , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  E. Roberts,et al.  Radiation protection training for cardiologists in the era of multiple imaging techniques and complex interventions. , 2016, The British journal of radiology.

[3]  P. Ballo,et al.  Near-zero x-ray in arrhythmia ablation using a 3-dimensional electroanatomic mapping system: A multicenter experience. , 2016, Heart rhythm.

[4]  S. Navadeh,et al.  Effectiveness of Policies on Reducing Exposure to Ionizing Radiation From Medical Imaging: A Systematic Review. , 2015, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[5]  H. Heidbuchel,et al.  The appropriate and justified use of medical radiation in cardiovascular imaging: a position document of the ESC Associations of Cardiovascular Imaging, Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Electrophysiology. , 2014, European heart journal.

[6]  F. Gaita,et al.  A new electrophysiology era: zero fluoroscopy , 2013, Journal of cardiovascular medicine.

[7]  M. Vidovich,et al.  Radiation safety among cardiology fellows. , 2010, The American journal of cardiology.

[8]  Gabriel Bartal,et al.  Occupational Radiation Protection in Interventional Radiology: A Joint Guideline of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe and the Society of Interventional Radiology , 2009, CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology.

[9]  E. Picano,et al.  Lack of radiological awareness among physicians working in a tertiary-care cardiological centre. , 2005, International journal of cardiology.

[10]  Stephen Balter,et al.  ACCF/AHA/HRS/SCAI clinical competence statement on physician knowledge to optimize patient safety and image quality in fluoroscopically guided invasive cardiovascular procedures. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians Task , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.