Research Topics: Radiographers And Practitioners

Radiographers and Practitioners in IR(ME)R

Radiographers and Practitioners in IR(ME)R Introduction The work in the medical settings is indeed difficult and challenging. But the professionals assured that they are highly skilled and knowledgeable in their craft. And with the help of the various experiences, the health care providers can accurately scan and cure the ill. It is a critical period in the health care settings if the people are challenged by their changing role. The practitioners might find it difficult to adopt in the nature of their work within a limited timescale. Background and Problem Statement Radiographers have highly skills in terms of imaging modalities. To carefully assess the patient’s condition, the need for a practitioner is placed in their side. However, many radiographers can also have the advanced techniques and skills of a practitioner. Appropriate skills are needed in crafting the medical reports (Garas and Freeman, 2008). Through the collaboration of the radiologist and the practitioner, an image is produced and can identify the causes of serious illness. In this sense, the importance of the radiography workforce in the hospital is emphasized. Still, through the IR(ME)R 2000, there are other workforce issues that keeps the challenging the effectiveness of the clinical evaluation.       Research Objectives The first objective of the study is to understand the challenge involves in the clinical evaluation. Second is to differentiate the roles of the radiographers and practitioners in medical settings. And third is to measure the ability of the radiographers to take the role of the practitioners. Research Questions The study understands the difficulties involved in the workforces, most especially in the health care settings. Therefore, several questions are provided to address the issues and meet the objectives of the study. 1.      What are the role of the radiographers and practitioners to effectively evaluate the clinical results? 2.      What are the aims or the purpose of the IR(ME)R? 3.      What could be the changes that might appear in the imaging procedure? Literature Review Ionizing Radiation Medical Exposure Regulation 2000 or also known as IR(ME)R 2000 is centered on the issue of radiographs. In clinical setting, the practitioner, who is also called as the referrer are required to enter in clinical evaluation of the radiographs to construct the findings on the patients’ conditions. In clinical evaluation, there is a need for the radiology report, and therefore, should be necessary information (Barry, 2005). The role of the radiographer is affected by the innovation and improvement in the health care settings. Within the UK, the clinical imaging in operating system are also affected by the rapid access to the technologies and with that, the interpretation of the images needs to be both rapid and accurate. This can only be achieved is the experts holds appropriate skills. The rapid phase of changes can be also associated with the mobility of problems in the radiological investigation. The cooperation of the knowledge and skills in the path of radiology is indeed need with the imaging modality. The workforce in the medical management is expected to ensure the correct competencies (Garas and Freeman, 2008). The introduction of the IR(ME)R focus on its aim to establish a radiograph evaluation and then, record for the purpose of the reviews. This new regulation in the radiography is being monitored through the provision of the auditing procedures to achieve the required standard in work. IR(ME)R highlights the guideline that justifies the exposure which is required to the patients . In order to address the medical findings, the collaboration of the people in the radiography is important in the treatment planning process (Barry, 2005). The role of the practitioner in radiography is to perform with the wide-ranging complex in undertaking the imaging examination. And many professional suggested that the radiographers themselves. Practitioners provide the treatment, advice, and support for the patients during the radiotherapy (Shaw, 2005). Methodology The applied method in the study is the use of the comparative case studies which are all related to the working condition in the radiography. The information that the previous case studies can provide is very essential in the current study. In addition, the advantage of the study is recognized for the information were took place in different health care settings wherein there is a good position to review the data and professional opinions, compare the clinical observation and contexts, and generate a sound analysis. Conclusion The role of the radiographers and the practitioners works independently in the health care settings. Although there are many changing of roles in the health industry, the professionals still centered in justify examinations and treatments, which are all under the IR(ME)R 2000. References: Barry, G., 2005. The British Orthodontic Society Clinical Effectiveness Bulletin [Online] Available at: http://www.bos.org.uk/Resources/British%20Orthodontic%20Society/Migrated%20Resources/Documents/CE%20Bulletin%202005.pdf [Accessed 26 March 2010]. Garas, K., & Freeman, C., 2008. The Role of the Radiographer in Stroke Management, Society of Radiographers [Online] Available at: http://www.sor.org/public/document-library/sor_role_radiographer_stroke_management_2nd_edition.pdf [Accessed 26 March 2010]. Shaw, A., 2005. Implementing Radiography Career Progression: Guidance for Managers, Radiography [Online] Available at: http://www.18weeks.nhs.uk/Asset.ashx?path=/Imaging tool/career-progression.pdf [Accessed 26 March 2010]. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Radiographers and Practitioners in IR(ME)R

Radiographers and Practitioners in IR(ME)R Introduction The work in the medical settings is indeed difficult and challenging. But ...