Transforming and Supporting Patient Care - Health Professions ...

143Chapter 6 – Scope of Practice of Medical Radiation TechnologyAwareness of radiation protection issues is generally low, with widespreadunderestimation of relative doses and risks. A growing body of research isemerging on this issue. 50Future Priorities: Challenges and OpportunitiesThe literature identifies several specific areas where future research isrequired:• Training and education to support the changing scope of practice –including establishment of guidelines to ensure MRTs haveappropriate skills and knowledge, 51• Mechanisms to monitor and control the adoption and use ofexpensive, emerging technology, 52• Web-based and other electronic tools for the management of testresults to support clinical decision-making, improve timely accessand avoid costly duplication, 53• Collection of regular supply and demand information for MRTs inCanada to inform human resources planning and forecasting, 54 and• Awareness of long-term health risks associated with radiologicalimaging by auditing prescriptions and providing more explicitinformed consent forms. 55Jurisdictional ReviewAmong Canadian jurisdictions, Ontario, Alberta and Quebec have the mostcomprehensive legislation governing MRT practice. There is little or nolegislation or regulation governing MRT practice in other jurisdictions,although they do adhere to the scope and standards set by the CanadianAssociation of Medical Radiation Technologists (CAMRT). CAMRTadministers the certification exam for MRTs across Canada and its scopeand standards are used as the central guidelines for the profession. Ontariois viewed as a leader in the regulation and utilization of MRTs amongCanadian jurisdictions.Internationally, HPRAC reviewed the regulatory models in Australia, NewZealand and Great Britain.50Shiralkar, S. et al. Doctor’s Knowledge of Radiation Exposure: Questionnaire Study. British MedicalJournal. Vol 327:371-372. 2003; Thomas, K. et al. Assessment of Radiation Dose Awareness AmongPaediatricians. Paediatric Radiology. Vol 36(8):823-832. 2006.51Brealey, Stephen. Measuring the Effects of Image Interpretation: An Evaluative Framework. ClinicalRadiology. Vol 56(5):348. 2001.52Institute for Clinical and Evaluative Sciences. Diagnostic Services in Ontario: Descriptive Analysisand Jurisdictional Review. April 2007 (revised).52Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists. Supply and Demand Study of Utilizationof Medical Radiation Technologists in Canada. September 2006.53Bairstow, P.J. et al. Diagnostic Imaging Pathways: Development, Dissemination, Implementationand Evaluation. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. Vol 18(1):51-57. 2006; Institute forClinical and Evaluative Sciences. Diagnostic Services in Ontario: Descriptive Analysis andJurisdictional Review. April 2007 (revised).54Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists. Supply and Demand Study of Utilizationof Medical Radiation Technologists in Canada. September 2006.55Picano, E. Sustainability of medical imaging: doctors and patients should be more aware of thelong term risks of radiological investigations. British Medical Journal. Vol 328:578-580. 2004.HPRAC Critical Links January 2009