Transforming and Supporting Patient Care - Health Professions ...

145Chapter 6 – Scope of Practice of Medical Radiation Technologyhealth professions were asked how the changes would affect their role andinteractions with MRTs in the provision of diagnostic services to the public.A roundtable meeting was held with representatives of the College andAssociation and health professions impacted by the proposed changes. Afurther session took place with MRTs from the four practice areas who workin various settings (hospitals and specialty and community-based clinics) toget their perspectives on the proposed changes. Overall, the feedbackreceived through the consultation meetings points to a high level ofsupport among key stakeholders for the changes proposed.HPRAC invited input from the Ontario Association of Radiologists 57 and wasadvised of concerns about the risk of harm to patients arising from theproposed changes to the MRT scope of practice, as well as the potentialimpact on the practice of radiologists. HPRAC further explored these issuesthrough a teleconference with representatives from the diagnostic imaging,radiation oncology and nuclear medicine sections of the Ontario MedicalAssociation and found that collaboration and information sharing allowedfor a better understanding of the proposals and their potential impact.The key points emerging from HPRAC’s consultations on MRT scope ofpractice changes are summarized under three main categories: SystemNeeds, Scope of Practice and Competency.System NeedsA general theme from the consultations was that the proposed changeswould improve delivery of health care services to patients in anenvironment where there is already considerable collaboration amongMRTs and other health professions.Arguments were made that the proposal is about maximizing the use ofMRTs’ expertise in the utilization of advanced technology that assistsdiagnosis and treatment. HPRAC also heard from radiologists whosuggested that, rather than expanding the direct authority of MRTs, thefocus of any changes should be to ensure that MRTs maintain thecompetencies to meet technological changes in the field, particularly theshift to digital imaging. Radiologists also suggested that technologicaladvancements are making it possible to use different diagnostic approachesthat are not reflected in the proposals contained in the submission. Forexample, the submission cites the need for the controlled act of inserting aninstrument, hand or finger beyond the anal verge to facilitate theadministration of barium enemas; however, it was suggested that bariumenemas might soon be out of use in favour of CT colonography.Participants in the consultations indicated that the proposed changeswould provide a structured regulatory framework for the provision of MRTservices and consequently, reduce service gaps, improve access forpatients requiring diagnostic or therapeutic interventions and reduce waittimes. It was emphasized that provincial and federal legislation containmultiple layers of public protection that impact on the practice of MRTs.57The Ontario Association of Radiologists did not file a written response to the submission.HPRAC Critical Links January 2009