|
(1) Is there a departmental mechanism for providing patients (or their representative) with information relating to the risks/benefits associated with radiation dose from the medical exposure?
|
|
(2) Is there an established mechanism within the department to register and analyse accidental /unintended exposures?
|
|
(3) Is there a departmental policy for informing patients, or their representative, that they have undergone an accidental exposure?
|
|
(4) Is there a mechanism for record keeping and retrospective analysis of accidental or unintended medical exposures?
|
|
(5) Is there a mechanism for referring accidental exposure events to the medical physics expert (MPE) and informing the competent authority of significant events?
|
|
(6) Does the department utilise criteria, provided by the relevant radiation protection competent authority, for what constitutes an accidental or unintended significant exposure?
|
|
(7) Is there evidence for appropriate training for individuals with delegated responsibility (in the case of nonradiologists) for the justification process?
|
|
(8) Is there a departmental mechanism to confirm and document the non-pregnancy status of individuals undergoing medical exposures?
|
|
(9) Is there a written protocol for the identification of who is responsible for the justification process?
|
|
(10) For radiation exposure related to health screening by invitation on asymptomatic individuals, is there a local policy affirming justification by a competent authority?
|
|
(11) What percentage of examinations involving ionising radiation are justified in advance of being performed?
|
|
(12) What mechanism exists on the request form for contacting referrers to permit pre-exposure justification discussions to occur if necessary?
|
|
(13) Is there a written protocol for who may be responsible for justification of X-ray/fluoroscopic/ interventional ionising radiological procedures?
|
|
(14) Is there a written protocol for who may be responsible for justification of CT examinations?
|
|
(15) What mechanism is used to evaluate patient dose in high-dose procedures?
|
|
(16) What percentage of radiodiagnostic procedures have established diagnostic reference levels (DRL)?
|
|
(17) Specific technical requirements for equipment in use for medical exposures
|
|
(18) Eye lens dose limits for occupational exposure
|
|
(19) Initial education and training in radiation protection
|
|
(20) Audit of education plus training in radiation protection, doses and side effects
|
|
(21) Provision of clinical information to support justification
|
|
(22) Staff dosimetry audit – this includes a draft adapted questionnaire
|
|
(23) Evaluation of the role and responsibilities of the medical physics expert
|
