174 G . Rincón et al .: Radioprotection 2024 , 59 ( 3 ), 173 – 183
2 Materials and methods
We used qualitative methodology under a phenomenological paradigm by using conversational interviews to evaluate the participants perceptions of the exposure risk . Data collection was performed from 2019-2020 using semistructured interviews , including the participants workplace experiences . Participant data was anonymised to customise the content and provide confidentiality . Open-ended questions were asked , containing core topics associated with occupational health and safety , such as knowledge , skills , ergonomics , quality of emitting sources , equipment maintenance and handling , personal relationships , and waste management . The interview began with a question that could be adapted to the of the interviewees responses to promote flexibility among participants ( Troncoso and Amaya , 2017 ). Participants expressed their opinions , which were recorded and transcribed verbatim . The scheduled interviews were conducted away from the workplace ; participants provided written informed consent after we explained the study objective .
The interview scripts contained guiding questions within each topic to deepen interactions with participants , as follows :
Based on your experience in the position you hold , what do you know about occupational hazards ? What knowledge do you have about ionizing radiation ? Which protective measures do you know ? How long have you been working in the healthcare area and what positions have you held ? Does the healthcare-providing institution regularly perform training / updates ? What is your opinion about the teams there ? What is your opinion about the equipment you use ? What can you tell us about overtime and night shifts at the healthcare facility ? In your experience , what do you know about accidents and incidents ? Which actions should you perform after filling a clinical record ?
Homogeneous sampling was considered . Therefore , participants had to meet the inclusion criteria : Colombian nationality , years in position , and training received . We identified participants with similar profiles to describe common situations within a specific work group . In total , practices were explored among five participants with > 20 years of experience after the study objectives and conditions were explained .
The work prior to data collection involved six phases : data familiarisation , initial category or code generation , topic search , topic review , topic definition and naming , and report preparation ( Braun and Clarke , 2006 ). Considering the coding processes conducted independently by the researchers , five categories were obtained and assessed using the information obtained and literature reviewed as follows : occupational risk , qualification and workplace environment , occupational incidents , preventive measures against occupational risk , and equipment and technology use .
3 Results
The results are shown schematically according to the categories analysed and summarised in the figures that follow .
3.1 Occupational risk
Next , we analysed the occupational risk category based on the participants narrative . The analysis and interpretation of the work experience data was conducted considering individual lifestyles , feelings , and expressions of risk , and the understanding that ionizing radiation exposure is a real phenomenon although it cannot be felt , seen , or smelled ; penetration can modify internal structures at the cellular level , which was understood by the participants .
To understand the category of occupational risk in this group of participants , three major themes were identified from the analysis of the information obtained through the interviews . To facilitate understanding , a diagram was created ( Fig . 1 ), and the questions asked were as follows . Based on your experience in the position you hold , are you aware of the occupational risks ? ( e . g ., physical or biological , risk classes , TOE , average premium , high risk , vacation periods ). What knowledge do you have about ionizing radiation ? ( e . g ., stochastic and deterministic effects , heredity , and cellular effects can occur ). During your time in the service , have you experienced discomfort or are you aware of any health alterations related to your work performance ? ( e . g ., thyroid alterations , clinical histories , medium corpuscular volume , origin of cataracts , dosimetric values , environmental / personal , dry skin ). What protection measures do you know ? ( e . g ., exposure distance , direct / indirect exposure , shielding [ screens ], times , remote control , collimation , personal protective equipment [ PPE ] required , amperage ).
For the participants , exposure to radiation is considered a daily occupational risk and is conceived as something profound , although is part of daily activity and is constant in their work day ; their provision of care means that at any time an emitting source or piece of equipment used to generate radiation as appropriate requires exposing themselves to dispersed traces that can be absorbed according to the procedure , physical space in the health institution , and clinical condition of the patients .
The understanding of occupational risk showed a subjective component associated with individual explanation . These results relate to the perception of occupational risk , and the accounts of experiences of the participants focused on understanding , exposure , and probability as an effect of their own interpretations .
Alex ’ s interview highlighted the learned concepts , as follows :
‘ As a teacher once taught me : any minimum produces a reaction , i . e ., any dose of radiation you receive produces an effect . Therefore ... one should protect oneself as much as possible .’ Exposure is associated with equipment use , fear , and health damage .