Editorial A
rticles authored by professionals including radiographers, radiologists, nurses and obstetricians are featured in this year's Imaging & Oncology. It's a pleasure to have the opportunity to deliver such a diverse selection of topics affecting our professions, all within one publication. Once again,
this edition offers sometimes controversial opinions from experts and showcases many great examples of ways to improve patient care. Helen Best from Public Health England discusses the transparent and open culture of incident reporting within our radiotherapy departments, and how this practice maintains and improves patient safety. Sarah James and Alison Stemp reveal duplication and waste when it comes to patient information resources in radiotherapy and call for an end to what I think can only be described as frequent wheel reinvention. In UK antenatal imaging services, just when we've all settled nicely into offering first trimester screening for Down's syndrome, along comes another test, which is more sensitive and will likely result in big changes to services again very soon. Kemp and Smith provide a must-read article on the subject. At the other end of the human lifespan, David Fitzgerald talks of imaging for dementia. I acknowledge that some types affect younger adults but it is more commonly associated with older people, and David puts forward a powerful argument for increased funding in this area. Similarly, Knapp et al explain how vertebral fracture assessment enhances DXA services, which are increasingly in demand, due to osteoporosis in the older population and increased fracture risk in the obese. Incidentally, one of the authors of this paper, Robert Meertens, has just won the 2015 ASRT Leadership Academy for Educators Award. Warmest congratulations to him. The overseas contribution this year is from Cindy Petree, a radiologist assistant from Indiana, USA. Although the role is unique to North America it reminds me very much of that of consultant radiographers in the UK as she explains the diversity, rewards and difficulties associated with it. Giles Maskell puts forward a bold but balanced argument regarding the current trend of the 'worried
well' buying themselves CT scans. Also in this issue, Wotton and Freeman discuss how new multiparametric techniques in ultrasound may offer the chance of conservative management, rather than traditional radical orchidectomy, for some men with testicular lesions. I'm sure that cohort would be very grateful indeed.
-4-
As the NHS consults on proposals to allow radiographers to prescribe medicines independently, Hogg
et al remind us of the potential benefits were legislation passed. Further papers by Grainger, and Woznitza and Keane, highlight recent new guidance in MRI safety and the ongoing and excellent image interpretation e-Learning for Healthcare resource. Were I to sum up this issue in seven words it would be; new techniques, new roles, education and safety.
Grateful thanks to all the contributors for giving up their time to share their work and ideas, and many thanks also to the newly appointed Advisory Board for Imaging & Oncology, which I've assembled to assist me in the review process.
Hazel Edwards, Editor,
hazeledwards@sor.org
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68