Barriers and pathways to informed consent for ionising radiation imaging examinations: A qualitative study |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Pacific International Hospital, PO Box 6103, Boroko, NCD, Papua New Guinea;2. University of Papua New Guinea, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Discipline of Medical Imaging, UPNG Taurama Campus, PO Box, 5623, Boroko, NCD, Papua New Guinea;3. School of Dentistry & Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Building 30, Boorooma Street, Wagga Wagga, NSW, 2678, Australia;1. Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, Somerset, TA1 5DA, UK;2. University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health, St Luke''s Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK;1. Southern Health and Social Care Trust, Craigavon Area Hospital, Northern Ireland, UK;2. Ulster University of Jordanstown, Northern Ireland, UK;3. Radiology Department, 68 Lurgan Road, Portadown, BT63 5QQ, UK;4. School of Health Science, Ulster University, Jordanstown, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Co Antrim, BT37 0QB, UK;1. School of Allied Health Professions, Canterbury Christ Church University, Kent, UK;2. Nuclear Medicine, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, Maidstone, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | IntroductionInformed consent for ionising radiation medical imaging examinations represents a recent change to medical imaging practice. This practice has not had a definitive and authoritative integration into clinical practice, and lack of direction has caused many health care professionals to be unsure of an appropriate consent methodology. Consent practices have been undertaken inconsistently and sometimes poorly. This research sought to investigate what barriers exist to meaningful informed consent, and what pathways are suggested to overcome these barriers. These views are then discussed in the context of practical health care consent practices.MethodsA semi-structured interview explored the views of radiographers and radiologists on the practice of disclosing the ionising radiation risk of a clinical medical imaging examination. Qualitative data was analysed using a nominal method of quantitative transformation. Responses were reviewed, and a set of definitive themes constructed. Participants considered the influences, logistics and barriers to the informed consent process. Participants were then asked what pathways might be developed that would improve the process.ResultsTwenty-one (21) radiographer participants and nine (9) radiologists were interviewed. The barriers to consent identified issues of time constraints, lack of a unified message, and patient presentations. Pathways suggested included limiting the scope of the consent practice, sharing the consent responsibility, and formulation of definitive consent guidelines.ConclusionA unified, definitive series of guidelines for informed consent for ionising radiation examinations would alleviate many of the identified barriers. Having the consent process consistently begin with the referring doctor would facilitate more meaningful consent. |
| |
| Keywords: | Ionizing radiation Informed consent Ethical practice |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
