N . Shubayr et al .: Radioprotection 2024 , 59 ( 1 ), 30 – 35 31
The healthcare industry works to improve people ’ s health and quality of life in general . Ionizing radiation is widely used in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures , such as radiography , fluoroscopy , computed tomography , nuclear medicine and radiotherapy . While radiation technology does have numerous advantages for patients , using it incorrectly or incompetently can endanger the health of radiation workers and patients ( Briggs-Kamara et al ., 2013 ). Ionising radiation use is therefore a double-edged sword ( Briggs- Kamara et al ., 2013 ). Every year , around 7 million healthcare workers globally are vulnerable to radiation exposure due to their line of work . Moreover , over 1 billion radiological imaging examinations are performed annually around the world . Medical radiological technologist ( MRT ) professions are not always without risk . They frequently involve cost-risk-benefit analysis in the decision-making process . Radiation safety is a vital issue in medical imaging , as it involves the protection of patients , workers , the general public and the environment from the harmful effects of ionizing radiation . According to this concept , if radiation safety precautions are not put in place and followed , then ionising radiation utilised in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures will carry the danger of cancer induction to exposed patients and participating healthcare workers ( Ploussi et al ., 2016 ).
The foundation of all workplace behaviour is a strong safety culture . An organisation with a positive safety culture will have employees who consistently prioritise safety and prevent harm to their co-workers because these are simply part of the organisation ’ s values and norms . However , cultivating this type of culture can be difficult ( Cole et al ., 2014 ). People ’ s responses to risks and opportunities are often influenced by societal expectations and their subjective interpretation of information rather than rational analysis . Given the current societal perception of radiation protection , it is crucial to cultivate a culture of radiation protection to avoid regressing to a time when fear and superstition dictated societal norms and scientific discovery was met with punishment ( Golnik et al ., 2011 ).
The significance of radiation safety in the healthcare setting cannot be overstated , particularly as radiation usage has permeated the workplaces of RTs , exposing them to radiation on a regular basis . A solid RSC pursues to advance practice by controlling hazardous practices , limiting radiation risk and enhancing radiation protection ( Ploussi et al ., 2016 ). Several studies have been published in Saudi Arabia that focused only on the radiation protection knowledge , awareness and practices of different groups of professionals or patients ( Shubayr et al ., 2022 ; Alyami et al ., 2022 ). However , studies on RSC are scarce in Saudi Arabia , especially from a broader and more comprehensive concept that encompasses not only the scientific and technical aspects of radiation protection , but also the social and organizational factors that influence the attitudes , values , behaviors and experiences of radiation protection professionals and stakeholders . The aim of the study was to evaluate the perception of 11 determinants of RSC among MRTs in Saudi Arabia . The results of this study will provide valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of RSC in medical imaging departments , and suggest recommendations for improvement .
2 Materials and methodology
2.1 Study design and setting
This cross-sectional observational study was carried out in Saudi Arabia from June 2022 to February 2023 . In this study , the participants were MRTs associated with the radiology department in different hospitals and medical centres in Saudi Arabia . The sample size was calculated using G * Power software with an effect size of 0.15 , a p-value of 0.05 , power of 95 %, the required sample size was 130 . A simple random sampling method was used for the study . The survey was distributed online via Google Forms and a total of 496 questionnaires were collected for the analysis . The ethics committee of Jazan University approved the study . The participant ’ s consent was taken at the beginning of the survey .
2.2 Data collection tool
In this study , data were collected using a self-administered structured questionnaire . The questionnaire had two sections : the first section gathered socio-demographic data , including age , sex , educational level and work experience in years , and the subsequent section consisted of the RSC Survey Instrument for MRTs ( Moore , 2021 ), which was previously validated ( content validity index = 0.995 ) and found to be reliable ( a = 0.94 ). The survey comprised 11 determinants of RSC , including personal accountability , teamwork in imaging , teamwork across imaging stakeholders , questioning attitude , feedback loops , organisational learning , leadership actions , non-punitive response , error reporting , radiation policy and overall perception of radiation safety . It consists of 35 statements to assess the RSC in medical imaging departments . Each statement was evaluated on a five-point Likert scale ( strongly disagree , disagree , neutral , agree , strongly agree ) or a five-point frequency scale ( never , rarely , sometimes , most of the time , always ). When using the survey instrument , items related to a given factors should be averaged such that each scale can have a maximum score of 5 .
2.3 Data analysis
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 27 was used for data entry and analysis . The participants ’ characteristics were analysed using descriptive statistics based on frequencies , percentages , averages and standard deviations . The Kolmogorov – Smirnov test was used to test for normality . The nonparametric tests Mann – Whitney and Kruskal – Wallis tests were applied to determine associations between variables due to the violation of normality . Mean scores for each statement and for each of the 11 scales were calculated . Mean scores below 3 indicate poor perception , from 3 to 4 indicate moderate perception and above 4 indicate good perception . Values of p < 0.05 were considered significant .
3 Results
A total of 496 MRTs practicing in different radiology departments participated in this study . A summary of the sociodemographic characteristics of the MRTs is listed in Table 1 .