Thanks for that Robbie!

-----Original Message-----
From: Vikki Chase [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 02 October 2001 22:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Radiation in Saskatchewan


Regarding the Canadian training for Radiographic Technicians, when I looked
into working in Canada, the training required was studying for the CAMRT
(Canadian Association of Radiographic Technicians) exams, with provincial
associations in each province providing training (theoretical and practical)
and opportunity to sit the exams.
I found at the hospital I visited in Edmonton, Alberta,(U of A Hospital) a
huge number of radiologists for the size of department, compared to the UK.
Due to this, virtually every examination was under relatively close
supervision of a radiologist, and the basic protocols (set by radiologists)
included  multiple views for many examinations. I also found that
radiographers extending their role didn't happen- red dot systems,
radiographer reporting, etc. were a foreign concept- a radiologist was
always available to provide an opinion if needed, but Emergency Room doctors
had plenty of other people to ask before they'd want the opinion of a
radiographer (comment from radiographer at work there).
 And finally, I found the immobilization of children using equipment, as
well as radiographers, to be accepted practice. Parents were involved in the
reassurance and keeping child happy, but weren't the primary immobilisation
device (which I have found to be the only accepted practice in district
general hospitals in Northern England). This would perhaps account for good
image quality!

Vikki Chase
B Sc (Hons) Diagnostic Radiography
-----Original Message-----
From: Accident and Emergency Academic List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Robbie Coull
Sent: 02 October 2001 21:30
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Head injuries.


> Remember that the radiologists now have a duty to inform the DOH of any
> radiation
> exposure which they believe was inappropriate - ours will report films
> requested without
> good clinical reason - for example simple low back pain with PID. I only
spend
> a couple of
> minutes too; I simply say that an X-ray will not affect how I treat the
> patient and exposes
> then to unnecessary radiation. If they insist, I then write on the form
that
> it is at the
> patient's request and the radiographer refuses to do it because of the
> inappropriate
> exposure.

I'm working in a GP-run ER in far-north Saskatchewan for a few monrths and
the level of irradiation going on is incredible (although in their defence
they do have a TB problem).

Given the choice, I tend to review rather than xray (not just because of the
fee for service structure here!) but here I'm getting lateral chests as
standard and about 10 views of everything.  They do standard nasal bones,
rib views etc in their chase of the fractures and the RCMP officers request
we do xrays on assault victims to increase their chances of a conviction.

Having said that the people doing the xrays (I'm still unsure what their
training is, but the main one used to be the ambulance driver!) have the
children eating out of their hands, so the quality of paed films is good.


Robbie Coull

email: [log in to unmask]             website: http://www.coull.net


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This document may contain confidential information belonging to the sender
which is protected by the physician-patient privilege and should only be
read by those persons to whom it is addressed.  If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify the author. Please also destroy and delete
the message from your computer. Any form of unauthorised reproduction,
dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or
publication of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited.