Title

Assessment of Radiation Safety Education in Pre-Clinical Undergraduate Medical Education

Authors

Mitchka Mohammadi, MS, Eni Nako, MD, Harish Krishnamoorthi, MD, Enjae Jung, MD

Introduction

Medical students are included in clinical settings with radiation exposure early in their undergraduate medical education. Providing proper radiation safety education (RSE) earlier in training facilitates early adoption of protective practices, decreasing radiation absorption. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of different types of RSE pre-clinical students receive and the availability of protective equipment.

Methods

In this single-center study, a 12-question anonymous and voluntary survey was distributed to first and second-year medical students. Data were collected on demographics, clinical setting of radiation exposure, availability of protective equipment, and knowledge questions on radiation exposure. Students were stratified based on education received: an informal “in the moment” teaching by healthcare professionals (IF), a formal education as part of didactics or orientation to the clinical experience (FE), or no education (NE). Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-Squared Test and Levene ANOVA to calculate significance.

Results

Of the 300 first and second-year medical students, 134 responded (45%). We then excluded students who participated in clerkship rotations which left us with 115 pre-clinical students. Of these preclinical students, 57 (49.6%) reported being exposed to radiation during their informal shadowing or preceptorship with the most common fields being orthopedic surgery, interventional radiology, and anesthesiology. Participants exposed to radiation reported “always” having access to lead 66.7% of the time, thyroid shields 59.6% of the time, and lead glasses 10.5% of the time. Of the 115 preclinical students, 53.9% of students reported receiving IF 10.4% received FE, and 35.7% reported NE, though when looking at the 57 students that were exposed to radiation, 84.2% received IF, 14.0% FE, and 1.8% NE. Overall, only 33.9% correctly answered the relationship between distance and radiation dose and 15.6% correctly answered the recommended minimum safe distance from a radiation source. There was no difference between students who reported radiation exposure or not for either question (Q1, p=0.154; Q2, p+0.474). Compared to those who received NE, those who received any type of RSE were more likely to answer the knowledge questions correctly (p<0.01) with no difference noted between those receiving IF and FE (p=0.998).

Conclusion

In this single-center survey study, half of the responding pre-clinical students were involved in clinical experience where radiation was used, and most received informal “in the moment” teaching about radiation safety. Our study demonstrates that any type of teaching (informal or formal) is significantly associated with an increased ability to correctly answer our radiation safety questions, but the overall low rate of correct responses suggests that a standardized radiation safety curriculum should be implemented earlier in medical school.

References

N/A