Despite having an apparent abundance of policies and procedures at their fingertips and visible within the clinical imaging environment, nuclear medicine practitioners often appeared to ask their colleagues for advice or feedback. This was most noticeable in situations where experienced nuclear medicine practitioners would be approached by staff who were not as familiar with hybrid imaging techniques or technical aspects (e.g. Quality Control checks) and were asking for help / guidance. Although there was access to a range of policies and other useful documents, the practitioners generally preferred to ask their colleagues and learn from the experience. This often involved citing previous experiences and / or bringing up example studies to demonstrate particular aspects of image acquisition or processing etc.
The documents pertaining to hybrid imaging practice were being produced by a mixture of professional disciplines, including hybrid imaging practitioners and clinical scientists. There also appeared to be a notion of health competition between the professional disciplines in terms of who could produce the most documentation / policies in some incidences. Why was this the case? This behaviour appeared very 'tribal' in nature, almost mirroring graffiti street tags and highlighting a claim on the technology that was being used.
Issues however may arise when protocols change or new imaging pathways are introduced. How is this information disseminated through the hybrid imaging community? This also leads to a potential lack of evidence based knowledge development and practitioners not being able to develop enquiry based learning approaches within the workplace.
No comments:
Post a Comment