Icrp 113

1.
INTRODUCTION
(1) The number of diagnostic and interventional medical procedures using ionising
radiations is rising steadily, and procedures requiring higher patient doses are being
performed more frequently. As such, the need for medical sta and other healthcare
professionals to be educated in radiological protection (RP) is more compelling.
However, in most countries, RP training, particularly for medical professionals, is
decient. In this chapter, the need for education of dierent groups, including those
who refer for radiological procedures and medical students, is discussed. It is recommended that this education should cover both deterministic and stochastic eects of
ionising radiation with specic examples of RP factors that must be considered, and
should cover the need to manage radiation dose according to the principles of
radiation protection. Although recommendations have been made before by the
Commission, this is the rst report to specically address the topic of delivery of education and training for medical sta and other healthcare professionals involved in
the use of ionising radiation for diagnostic [radiography, uoroscopy, computer
tomography (CT) and nuclear medicine], interventional (uoroscopically guided),
and nuclear medicine therapy procedures.
1.1. Need for a greater awareness of radiological protection
(2) Many people are exposed to ionising radiation from diagnostic and interventional medical procedures. The radiation doses to individual patients can be among
the highest from human activities, even when radiotherapy is excluded. In some
countries with advanced healthcare systems, the mean number of diagnostic medical
procedures utilising ionising radiation approaches or exceeds one per year per
member of the population. Furthermore, radiation doses to patients from diagnostic
x-ray examinations dier widely between centres, suggesting that there is a widespread need for the optimisation of RP (ICRP, 2000).
(3) In order to avoid unnecessary risk, radiological procedures should only be
undertaken when they are expected to inuence patient management. In order to
ensure that all medical radiation procedures are justied, awareness needs to be
raised about both the benets and the risks of such procedures among those clinicians who request them. Recent increases in the number, variety, and complexity
of interventional procedures can result in radiation doses to patients being suciently high to induce deterministic eects, and doses to the medical professionals
conducting the procedures can come close to occupational dose limits (ICRP,
2000b). Therefore, particular attention to the management (reduction) of doses to
both patients and professionals in interventional procedures is important.
(4) Optimisation of RP for patients and medical personnel in diagnostic and interventional medical procedures requires the conviction, engagement, and competent
performance of the medical, radiographic, physics, and technical personnel involved.
Planned education and training programmes for these personnel are essential to
ensure reasonable RP of patients and workers.
15
ICRP Publication 113
(5) RP education and training is decient in many countries for almost all types of
medical professionals requesting or performing diagnostic and interventional procedures. There are also deciencies for some other professionals involved in medical
exposures. This view is now largely shared by radiology and RP professionals,
who also agree about the importance of training medical sta in order to improve
the situation.
(6) The present report makes recommendations on training in RP for medical
practitioners, radiographers, physicists, dentists, technologists, and other healthcare
professionals who perform or provide support for diagnostic and interventional procedures utilising ionising radiation. It sets out guidance that should be considered by
the regulators, health authorities, medical institutions, and professional bodies with
responsibility for RP in medicine, as well as the industry that produces and markets
the equipment used in these procedures. This guidance should also be considered by
universities and other academic institutions responsible for the education of professionals involved in the use of radiation in health care. Guidance is given on education requirements in RP for those who refer for diagnostic and interventional
procedures, and medical and dental students who will refer in the future, to aid in
the selection of content for medical degrees and postgraduate medical studies. This
report does not address radiation therapy, except as it concerns some aspects of
nuclear medicine therapy.
(7) One of the principal unresolved issues for accomplishing education and training in RP for medical professionals is the establishment of methods for delivery that
focus on relevant content and highlight practical issues. For the medical professional in particular, it is essential that courses are perceived as relevant and necessary, and only require limited time commitment so that individuals can be
persuaded of the advantages of attending. The use of e-learning structures would
allow professionals to complete training at convenient times, and to pace their
learning according to their previous knowledge. Some information on the content
of courses and on websites from which material can be obtained is given in Annexes
A, B, and C.
1.2. Education and training in radiological protection
(8) In the context of this report, education and training in RP should be understood as follows.
(9) The term education refers to the imparting of knowledge and understanding
on basic topics such as radiation hazards, radiation quantities and units, principles
of RP, radiation legislation, and RP factors aecting patient and sta doses. A basic
level of instruction should be given during medical, dental, and other healthcare degree courses. Specic training in RP should be guaranteed in radiographers education. More in-depth education on these topics for other specialists, such as
radiologists and medical physicists, should be given during postgraduate degrees.
(10) The term training refers to instruction and practice relating to the ionising
radiation modalities (e.g. CT, uoroscopy) used by the individual in medical
16
Education and Training in Radiological Protection for Diagnostic and Interventional Procedures
practice. It should include imparting of specialist knowledge required for optimisation of RP, and should involve a signicant element of practical skills.
(11) RP education and training for medical sta should be promoted by regulatory and health authorities. RP education programmes should be implemented by
the healthcare providers and universities, and co-ordinated at local and national levels to provide courses based on agreed syllabuses and similar standards. Scientic
and professional societies have a major role to play in ensuring the delivery of consistent education and training. They should contribute to the development of syllabuses, and to the promotion and support of education and training. Scientic
congresses should include refresher courses on RP, attendance at which could be
a requirement for continuing professional development for professionals using ionising radiation.
(12) Since almost all physicians and dentists will need to request medical exposures, it is appropriate to include basic RP education in medical and dental degrees.
The inclusion of RP in the syllabuses of medical and dental schools requires intersector co-operation at local and national level (e.g. universities, ministries of education).
The denition of a referrer is a medical doctor, dentist, or other health professional
who is entitled to refer individuals for medical exposures to a practitioner, in accordance with national requirements. The referring clinician forms part of the justication process because he/she has full knowledge of the patients clinical history,
although the nal decision regarding justication of the exposure is made by the
practitioner, who takes clinical responsibility for the exposure because of his/her
greater depth of knowledge and training in RP and imaging techniques. In situations
where the justication of referrals is not conrmed by a radiation specialist, the referrer will need to have substantially more training in radiological techniques and radiation risks in order to enable them to become a practitioner.
(13) Professionals involved more directly in the use of ionising radiation should
receive education and training in RP at the start of their career, and the education
process should continue throughout their professional life as the collective knowledge of the subject develops. It should include specic training on related RP aspects
as new medical devices or techniques are introduced into a centre.
(14) Medical physicists have a central role in all education and training programmes on RP as they know about the nature and type of radiation, and the RP
requirements for the application of ionising radiation. Medical physicists, radiographers, and radiologists should work closely with their medical specialist colleagues in
establishing and conducting training programmes.
(15) The radiological equipment manufacturers have an important role to play in
the optimisation of RP. They have a responsibility to make users aware of the dosimetric implications of the procedures, and to inform them about the proper application of dose-reduction technology. Equipment manufacturers also have a
responsibility to develop and make available appropriate tools that are built into
radiological equipment to facilitate easy and convenient determination and recording of exposure with reasonable accuracy.
17
1.3. Knowledge that radiological protection education and training should provide
1.3.1. Potential health eects from radiation exposure
(16) The purpose of managing the radiation dose in diagnostic and interventional
procedures is to avoid deterministic health eects, and to keep the probability of stochastic health eects of ionising radiation as low as reasonably achievable, taking
into account the needs of the medical procedure.
(17) Deterministic eects (harmful tissue reactions such as moderate and severe
radiation-induced skin injuries) occur when many cells in an organ or tissue are affected. The eects will only be clinically observable if the radiation dose is above a
certain threshold. These thresholds can be reached in localised regions of a patients
skin as a result of complex uoroscopically-guided interventional procedures (ICRP,
2000b). At present, it is a matter of debate whether the threshold for injury to the
lens of the eye is sometimes reached in operators performing interventional procedures, leading to an increased frequency of cataracts.
(18) Stochastic eects (e.g. cancer and heritable eects) can occur due to radiationinduced damage in the DNA of cells, which can cause the transformation of cells
that are still capable of reproduction. This can lead to a malignant condition. If
the initial damage is inicted to the germ cells in the gonads, heritable eects may
occur. It is likely that the probability of such eects increases proportionally with
dose for the levels of ionising radiation experienced in diagnostic and interventional
procedures. The increase in the probability for cancer induction is inuenced by age
at exposure, gender, and genetic susceptibility to cancer (ICRP, 2007b).
Eects on the embryo and fetus
(19) There is potential for radiation eects in the embryo/fetus which are related to
the stage of fetal development and the absorbed dose (ICRP, 2003b, 2007b). Possible
deterministic eects include resorption of the embryo during the pre-implantation
period, although this is likely to be very infrequent, and malformations which
may occur in various organs from the third week to the eighth week after conception
(organogenesis). Damage to the developing central nervous system may occur in the
early fetal period, particularly from the eighth week to the 15th week after conception, and to a lesser extent between the 16th week and the 25th week after conception. These deterministic eects have relatively high threshold radiation doses
(>100 mSv) and should not occur for optimised diagnostic procedures. With regard
to stochastic eects, there is an increase in the probability of leukaemia and other
cancers that may occur later in childhood from irradiation during all stages of fetal
development. These eects are stochastic in nature and therefore it is likely that there
is no threshold dose; as such, they may occur after low doses, although the probability is small.
(20) If sta are properly educated and trained in RP, doses from diagnostic procedures and, for the most part, uoroscopically-guided interventional procedures
should not approach the threshold for deterministic eects. The probability of
18
stochastic eects cannot be eliminated totally, so the appropriate approach is only to

refer for and conduct procedures when they are justied, and to take all reasonable
steps to manage the patient and sta doses from such procedures to ensure optimisation of RP.
1.3.2. Examples of the need to manage radiation dose
(21) A needs assessment should be carried out to identify learning objectives for
every group. Some practical examples of the need for education and training in
RP are given below.
(22) With regard to pregnant patients (ICRP, 2000a):
The fact that a patient is pregnant must be considered in the justication
of procedures for individual patients.
The manner in which an examination of a patient is performed depends on
whether the embryo/fetus will be in the direct beam, and whether the procedure requires a relatively high dose.
(23) With regard to interventional procedures (ICRP, 2000b):
Fluoroscopically-guided interventional procedures are being used by an
increasing number of clinicians, and many interventionists are not aware
of the potential for injury from these procedures and the simple methods
for decreasing their incidence. Occasionally, severe radiation-induced skin
injuries have occurred.
Interventional procedures are complex and demanding. They tend to be
very operator dependent with each centre having slightly dierent techniques. Individuals performing the procedures must be adequately trained
in both the clinical technique and in knowledge of radiation protection. A
second, specic, level of training in radiation protection, additional to that
undertaken for diagnostic radiology, is essential.
Patients undergoing dicult procedures need to be counselled on the radiation risks, and followed clinically when the associated radiation doses
may lead to injury. The patients personal physician should be informed
when there is a possibility of radiation eects.
(24) With regard to CT procedures (ICRP, 2000c, 2007a):
CT procedures can involve relatively high doses to patients, particularly
for modern CT scanners that employ multiple rows of detector arrays that
allow rapid scanning and wider scan coverage. Doses from multiple procedures often approach or exceed the levels known from epidemiological
studies to increase the probability of cancer.
CT with single photon emission CT (SPECT) in SPECT/CT scanners and
positron emission tomography (PET) in PET/CT scanners often combine
a high-dose nuclear medicine procedure with a CT scan and so result in
particularly high doses.
19
The referring physician should evaluate whether the result of each CT procedure will aect the clinical management of the patient, and the radiologist should concur that the procedure is justied. This includes an
understanding of the classication of the clinical indications into those
requiring higher-dose procedures and those for which lower-dose procedures will be sucient.
The radiologist and radiographer should be aware of the possibilities for
managing patient doses by adapting the technical parameters to each
patient and the specic procedure, with particular attention being paid
to paediatric patients.
There is potential for dose reduction with all CT systems. It is important
that radiologists, cardiologists, medical physicists, and radiographers
understand the relationship between patient dose and image quality, and
that not all diagnostic tasks require high-quality images.
Radiographers should have an understanding of the reduction that can be
made in exposure by applying specic factors for paediatric patients.
Many children have been examined using adult factors and given unnecessarily high doses in the past.
Operators of SPECT/CT and PET/CT scanners should take into account
that the CT component is often primarily for anatomical identication of
the site where the radiopharmaceutical is localised, so lower levels of image
quality and lower dose options may be appropriate.
(25) With regard to digital radiology procedures (ICRP, 2003a):
Digital techniques have the potential to improve the practice of radiology,
but higher doses than necessary may be delivered without any corresponding improvement in image quality.
Dierent medical imaging tasks require dierent levels of image quality.
The use of more radiation to give a higher level of image quality should
be avoided where this has no additional benet for the clinical purpose.
It is very easy to obtain (and delete) images with digital uoroscopy systems, and there may be a tendency to obtain more images than necessary.
Industry should promote tools to inform radiologists, radiographers, and
medical physicists about the recommended exposure parameters and the
resultant patient doses associated with digital systems.
Industry should co-operate closely with radiologists, radiographers, and
medical physicists to develop procedures and optimise protocols in order
to minimise doses given to patients.
(26) With regard to doses to operators (ICRP, 2000a,b):
If a medical professional participating in procedures utilising radiation
declares to her employer that she is pregnant, additional controls have
to be considered in order to attain a level of protection for the embryo/
fetus broadly similar to that provided for members of the public.
20
Interventionalists with heavy procedure workloads may be exposed to

high doses. Sometimes it may be necessary to limit the practice of specic
individuals to reduce the risk of radiation injury.
Dierent positions adjacent to the patient couch expose sta to higher or
lower dose rates. Sta should be educated about how dose rates vary adjacent to interventional x-ray equipment.
In Publication 103 (ICRP, 2007b, Para. 249), the Commission stated that:
However, new data on the radiosensitivity of the eye with regard to visual
impairment are expected. The Commission will consider these data and
their possible signicance for the equivalent dose limit for the lens of
the eye when they become available. Because of the uncertainty concerning
this risk, there should be particular emphasis on optimisation of RP in
situations of exposure to the eyes.
1.4. Recommendations in ICRP Publications 103 and 105
(27) The underlying objective for the RP training of medical professionals performing diagnostic and interventional procedures is to increase the prociency of
medical professionals in managing patient and sta doses so that radiation doses
are commensurate with the clinical task. Publication 103 (ICRP, 2007b, Para. 328)
and Publication 105 (ICRP, 2007c, Paras 106, 107, 108, and 110) provide the following recommendations concerning this training.
(28) Publication 103
The physicians and other health professionals involved in the procedures
that irradiate patients should always be trained in the principles of RP,
including the basic principles of physics and biology. The nal responsibility
for the medical exposure of patients lies with the physician, who therefore
should be aware of the risks and benets of the procedures involved (ICRP,
2007b, Para. 328).
(29) Publication 105
There should be RP training requirements for physicians, dentists, and other
health professionals who order, conduct, or assist in medical or dental procedures that utilise ionising radiation in diagnostic and interventional procedures, nuclear medicine and radiation therapy. The nal responsibility for
the radiation exposure lies with the physician, who should therefore be aware
of the risks and benets of the procedures involved (ICRP, 2007c, Para. 106).
Relative to radiation use in medicine, three distinct categories of physicians
can be identied:
physicians that are trained in the ionising radiation medical specialties (e.g. radiologists, nuclear medicine physicians, radiation
oncologists);
21
other physicians that utilise ionising radiation modalities in their

practice (e.g. cardiologists, vascular surgeons, urologists); and
physicians that prescribe medical procedures that use ionising radiation (ICRP, 2007c, Para. 107).
N.B. These categories are expanded in Chapter 2 of this report, and more detailed recommendations on the amounts of training for each category are given in Chapter 3.
Education and training, appropriate to the role of each category of physician,
should be given at medical schools, during the residency and in focused specic
courses. There should be an evaluation of the training, and appropriate recognition that the individual has completed the training successfully. In addition,
there should be corresponding RP training requirements for other clinical personnel that participate in the conduct of procedures utilising ionising radiation,
or in the care of patients undergoing diagnosis or treatments with ionising radiation (ICRP, 2007c, Para. 108).
One important need is to provide adequate resources for education and training in RP for future professional and technical sta who request or partake in
radiological practices in medicine. The training programme should include
initial training for all incoming sta, regular updating and retraining, and
certication of the training (ICRP, 2007c, Para. 110).
(30) The present report is limited to RP training for diagnostic and interventional
procedures, and nuclear medicine therapy.
1.5. Training in interpretation of images
(31) An important element that determines if a medical exposure is justied is
whether the images obtained can provide the information required for the clinical
task. Thus the clinicians for whom the images are provided must have appropriate
training in order to interpret relevant details in the images. The interpretation of
images will frequently be done by radiologists who have undergone extensive training. However, many images will be interpreted by other medical sta, and it is important that they receive sucient training in their medical degree or specialty training
for the level of interpretation that they will be required to perform. Training in interpretation of images is not the subject of this report, but is mentioned because interpretation represents an important aspect of the justication process for any clinical
exposure.
1.6. References
ICRP, 2000a. Pregnancy and medical radiation. ICRP Publication 84. Ann. ICRP 30 (1).
ICRP, 2000b. Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures. ICRP Publication
85. Ann. ICRP 30 (2).
22
ICRP, 2000c. Managing patient dose in computed tomography. ICRP Publication 87. Ann. ICRP 30 (4).
ICRP, 2003a. Managing patient dose in digital radiology. ICRP Publication 93. Ann. ICRP 34 (1).
ICRP, 2003b. Biological eects after prenatal irradiation (embryo and fetus). ICRP Publication 90. Ann
ICRP 33 (1/2).
ICRP, 2007a. Managing patient dose in multi-detector computed tomography. ICRP Publication 102.
Ann. ICRP 37 (1).
ICRP, 2007b. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (24).
ICRP, 2007c. Radiological protection in medicine. ICRP Publication 105. Ann. ICRP 37 (6).
UNSCEAR, 2000. Sources and Eects of Ionising Radiation. United Nations Scientic Committee on the
Eects of Atomic Radiation Report to the General Assembly with Scientic Annexes, United Nations,
New York.
23
2. HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS TO BE TRAINED

(32) Limited awareness of the risks from radiation among physicians is leading to
the over-prescription of radiation procedures in many countries. Physicians need to
understand the nature of the risks so that they can take them into account when
requesting medical exposures. When dealing with pregnant patients, the correct balance must be achieved between eective clinical benet, minimisation of risks, and
the avoidance of unnecessary termination. Interventional medical procedures carry
a risk of deterministic eects. In order to provide some information on the appropriate amount of education and training in RP, 15 categories of healthcare professionals have been identied: eight representing dierent groups of physicians and
dentists, and seven representing other healthcare professionals involved in the use
of radiation. Recommendations on training for the dierent categories are discussed,
including those for medical students and physicians who refer for medical procedures
using ionising radiation.
2.1. Consequences of failure to deliver training in radiological protection

(33) The rapid expansion in medical procedures using radiation over the last decade has resulted in radiation doses from medical exposures becoming a signicant
(and in some countries, the major) component of radiation exposure to the population (UNSCEAR, 2000). It is important that the medical profession and other
healthcare professionals understand the hazards in order to avoid the creation of
unnecessary risks to the population as a whole. The basic rule should be that all
exposures are justied in terms of the inuence that they will have on management
of the patient. Lack of knowledge may result in more ionising radiation imaging tests
being requested when other non-radiation tests could be performed, or when dierent lower-dose imaging tests could be carried out.
(34) In addition to over-prescription, there are many other consequences that can
arise from poor awareness and understanding of radiation hazards by medical practitioners. In pregnant women, a number of physicians have recommended termination of pregnancy following any medical imaging examination. This practice results
from a lack of understanding of the risks from radiation exposure. The lack of
knowledge may also lead to pregnant women not receiving the medical care that they
need because of exaggerated fears of the risks from fetal exposures.
(35) Those directly involved in exposures need RP training to ensure that procedures are optimised with regard to RP, so that radiation doses to individual patients
are not higher than necessary. There are continual new challenges as techniques are
developed. For example, digital radiology has the potential to reduce patient doses,
but can also increase doses signicantly; medical professionals need to be trained to
use this technology eectively. Experience has shown that many radiology departments have made the transition to digital equipment, but patient doses have not reduced and some have increased measurably. Publication 93 (ICRP, 2003) is a
25
dedicated report on the proper management of radiation dose in digital radiology,

and includes Section 2 on training needs for radiologists and radiographers, and
Annex C with an outline for education and training.
(36) Several medical specialties using ionising radiation as part of their clinical
work need to have some knowledge of RP. The level of education and training will
dier depending on the uses, the workload, and the level of risk (radiation doses)
involved. The need for medical doctors employing uoroscopically-guided procedures to be both trained and certied for this practice is very important to avoid
unnecessary exposures. There are other groups of healthcare professionals who
may have extensive or limited involvement with radiation exposures who also need
to be trained.
2.2. Categories of medical and healthcare professionals requiring education and
training
(37) In order to facilitate specication of the RP training required by dierent
medical and healthcare professionals, categories that cover the majority of those
involved are listed below.
Category 1 radiologists: physicians who are going to take up a career in
which the major component involves the use of ionising radiation in radiology. This includes those performing interventional radiology
procedures.
Category 2 nuclear medicine specialists: physicians who are going to take
up a career in which the major component involves the use of radiopharmaceuticals in nuclear medicine for diagnosis and treatment including
PET or PET/CT.
Category 3 cardiologists and interventionalists from other specialties:
physicians whose occupation involves a fairly high level of ionising radiation use, although it is not the major part of their work, such as interventional cardiologists. The specialties involved vary around the globe, but
may include vascular surgeons and neurosurgeons.
Category 4 other medical specialists using x rays: physicians whose occupation involves the use of x-ray uoroscopy in urology, gastroenterology,
orthopaedic surgery, neurosurgery, or other specialties.
Category 5 other medical specialties using nuclear medicine: physicians
whose occupation involves prescription and use of a narrow range of
nuclear medicine tests.
Category 6 other physicians who assist with radiation procedures: physicians such as anaesthetists who have involvement in uoroscopy procedures directed by others, and occupational health physicians who review
records of radiation workers.
Category 7 dentists: dentists who take and interpret dental x-ray images
routinely.
26
Category 8 medical referrers: physicians who request examinations and

procedures involving ionising radiations, and medical students who may
refer for examinations in the future.
Category 9 medical physicists: medical physicists specialising in RP,
nuclear medicine, or diagnostic radiology.
Category 10 radiographers, nuclear medicine technologists, and x-ray
technologists: individuals who are going to take up a career in which a
major component is involved with operating and/or testing x-ray units,
including those carrying out some tests on a range of x-ray units in dierent hospitals and operating radionuclide imaging equipment.
Category 11 maintenance engineers and clinical applications specialists:
individuals with responsibilities for maintaining the x-ray and imaging systems (including nuclear medicine), or advising on the clinical application
of such systems.
Category 12 other healthcare professionals: other professionals such as
podiatrists, physiotherapists, and speech therapists who may be involved
in the use of radiology techniques to assess patients.
Category 13 nurses: nursing sta and other healthcare professionals
assisting in diagnostic and interventional x-ray uoroscopy procedures,
radiopharmaceutical administration, or the care of nuclear medicine
patients.
Category 14 dental care professionals: dental hygienists, dental nurses,
and dental care assistants who take dental radiographs and process
images.
Category 15 chiropractors: chiropractors and other healthcare professionals who may refer for, justify, and take radiographic exposures.
Category 16 radiopharmacists and radionuclide laboratory sta: radiopharmacists and individuals who use radionuclides for diagnostic purposes such as radioimmunoassay.
Category 17 regulators: individuals with responsibility for enforcing ionising radiation legislation.
2.3. Training for healthcare professionals
2.3.1. Medical professionals involved directly with the use of radiation
(38) Diagnostic radiologists and nuclear medicine specialists in some countries are
given an extensive formal training programme and certication during their residency, typically involving 3050 h of training in RP. These specialist groups need
a high level of understanding of the hazards and RP for many dierent scenarios.
Similar levels of training are required in all countries.
(39) Interventional procedures can involve high doses of radiation, and the special
radiological risk needs to be taken into account if deterministic eects on the skin are
27
to be avoided. In Publication 85 (ICRP, 2000), ICRP proposed a second level of RP

training for interventional radiologists and cardiologists:
Interventional procedures are complex and demanding. They tend to be very

operator dependent with each centre having slightly dierent techniques. It is
particularly important in these circumstances that individuals performing the
procedures are adequately trained in both the clinical technique and in knowledge of RP. A second, specic, level of training in RP, additional to that undertaken for diagnostic radiology, is desirable. Specic additional training should
be planned when new x-ray systems or techniques are implemented in a centre.
A quality assurance programme for interventional radiology facilities should
include RP training and assessment of dose control technique (ICRP, 2000,
Para. 50).
(40) Training in RP given to interventional cardiologists and those directing cardiac CT in most countries is limited. The Commission considers that provision of
more RP training for this group should be a priority.
(41) Signicantly less training is given to other medical specialists such as vascular
surgeons, urologists, endoscopists, and orthopaedic surgeons before they direct uoroscopically-guided invasive techniques. The times allocated for this RP training
depend on previous knowledge of radiation physics and radiobiology, but typically
should be at least 15 h (taking into account formal courses and on-the-job training).
A similar amount of RP training but with a dierent emphasis is recommended for
physicians involved in the delivery of a narrow range of nuclear medicine tests relating to their specialty.
(42) Other medical specialties not directly operating the x-ray units or administering radionuclides but closely involved with the specialist operator, such as anaesthetists, will require some training on the basic aspects of RP [e.g. scattered radiation,
how equipment use aects their exposure, radiation units, radiobiology, and risks
during pregnancy and breast feeding (if open radiation sources are used)]. For these
personnel, a combination of seminars and practical demonstrations is likely to be the
best arrangement for their RP training. E-learning programmes incorporating videos
and other technical aids can enhance the learning experience.
(43) Occupational health doctors who review dose and health records of radiation
workers will also require education in RP. They may have to decide whether individuals should continue to work with radiation after high exposures, if they have particular pathologies, or if they are pregnant.
2.3.2. Medical and healthcare professionals prescribing diagnostic exposures and
medical students
(44) The vast majority of medical professionals will need to refer for diagnostic
examinations and procedures involving the use of ionising radiations. A similar level
28
of education in RP needs to be given to present and future potential referrers with

particular emphasis on paediatrics.
(45) The information that these groups need to know is the basis of biological effects of ionising radiation, a basic idea of the radiological quantities and units, and
the relationship between radiation dose and the increase in probability of stochastic
eects. Specic risks during pregnancy should also be included. The European Commission has published guidelines on this issue (EC, 2000).
(46) Referrers need to be familiar with referral criteria appropriate for the range of
examinations that they are likely to request. It is recommended that referral guidelines for imaging, such as those published by radiology societies, should be consulted. These are updated periodically as more collective experience is gained, so it
is important to recheck criteria periodically, particularly when new techniques are
involved.
(47) Education in RP for future referrers could be included in a dedicated short
course or integrated into education on the fundamentals of diagnostic techniques
with ionising radiation in the medical degree.
(48) Other healthcare professionals, such as nurse practitioners in casualty departments and podiatrists, may request medical exposures for specic conditions, and
will require some instruction in radiation hazards, although this can be more limited
because of the narrower scope of practice. In some countries, nurse practitioners and
other healthcare professionals are permitted to practice independently and refer for a
limited range of medical exposures, and these individuals should be required to have
the same training and certication as those in Category 8.
2.3.3. Other healthcare professionals
(49) Training for healthcare professionals in RP will be related to their specic
jobs and roles. Medical physicists working in RP and other radiation specialists
should have the highest level of training in RP as they have additional responsibilities as trainers in RP for most clinicians.
(50) Radiographers, nuclear medicine technologists, and x-ray technologists will
all require substantial training in RP as this represents a core aspect of their work
and they will contribute to the training of others.
(51) Maintenance engineers with responsibilities for imaging systems and clinical
applications specialists require training in RP, not only related to their personal roles
but also in RP of patients. It is important that they understand how the settings of
the x-ray systems and adjustments that they may make inuence the radiation doses
to patients.
(52) Nurses and other healthcare professionals assisting in uoroscopic procedures
require knowledge of the risks and precautions to minimise their exposure and that
of others. There is evidence of a risk of lens opacity among those working in cardiac
catheterisation laboratories where RP has not been optimised.
29
2.4. References
EC, 2000. Referral Criteria for Imaging. Radiation Protection 118. European Commission, Directorate
General for the Environment, Luxembourg, 2000 <http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/radioprotection/
publication/doc/118_en.pdf>. (accessed March 1, 2011).
ICRP, 2000. Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures. ICRP Publication
85. Ann. ICRP 30 (2).
ICRP, 2003. Managing patient dose in digital radiology. ICRP Publication 93. Ann. ICRP 34 (1).
UNSCEAR, 2000. Sources and Eects of Ionising Radiation. United Nations Scientic Committee on the
Eects of Atomic Radiation Report to the General Assembly with Scientic Annexes, United Nations,
New York.
30
3. PRIORITIES IN TOPICS TO BE INCLUDED IN TRAINING

(53) The objectives of RP education and the topics that should be included in RP
training are considered in this chapter. The need to engage those undergoing the
training and make them aware of the radiation hazards and risks associated with
the techniques that they are using is stressed. It is not an easy task to achieve eective
training with a realistic approach to the use of radiation. The recommended content
of courses on radiation hazards, risks, and applications for all physicians is given.
This material might be covered in medical and other healthcare degrees. Other topics
which will dier depending on the role of the physician or healthcare professional are
also considered. Recommendations on the amount of training and the subject matter
that is more or less important for each group are given in Tables 3.1 and 3.2.
3.1. Objectives of training
(54) A key component in the success of any training programme is to convince the
engaged personnel about the importance of the principle of optimisation in RP so
that they implement it in their routine practice. In order to achieve this, the material
must be relevant and presented in a manner that the clinicians can relate to their own
situation.
(55) Priority topics to be included in the training will depend on the involvement of
the dierent professionals in medical exposures. For example, some operational
aspects are important for radiologists and nuclear medicine specialists, but these are
not relevant for referrers. However, most medical specialists will require knowledge
of basic topics such as radiation hazards and risks. Interventional operators must be
aware that deterministic eects have to be avoided by managing the doses to patients
(and personnel) in such a way that they are kept well below the threshold values.
(56) Deterministic eects can be perceived readily by those with a basic understanding of RP principles, as this is a simple process of cell killing. The teaching programmes for interventional radiologists and cardiologists should provide data on
doseresponse relationships for deterministic eects, how these are aected by secondary factors, and the magnitudes of threshold doses for dierent tissues.
(57) The mechanisms involved in the induction of stochastic eects, on the other
hand, and the probability of their occurrence as a function of dose may not be obvious to all medical and healthcare professionals. Whereas increased incidence and
mortality from malignancies after high doses is commonly known and not questioned (e.g. atomic bomb survivors and many other groups), the situation at low
doses (<0.1 Sv) is a dierent matter, as the postulated risk is derived by extrapolation
from higher doses, and is based on a hypothesis. In addition, the magnitude of the
risk (probability of occurrence) in the low-dose domain is small, delayed in time, and
cannot be attributed directly to an exposure.
(58) The risk of death or serious health impairment in the daily practice of clinical
medicine is several orders of magnitude higher than that which can be linked to a
stochastic phenomenon resulting from a diagnostic or interventional radiation procedure. Moreover, the delay in manifestation is quite large, so it is not surprising
31
Table 3.1. Recommended radiological protection training requirements for dierent categories of physicians and dentists.
Training area
1 DR
2 NM
3 CDI MDI
4 MDX
5 MDN
6 MDA
7 DT
8 MD
m
m
m
m
m
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
m
m
3050
h
h
h
l
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
m
3050
l
l
m
m
l
h
m
m
h
h
h
h
h
m
l
m
m
2030
m
m
l
h
m
m
m
m
m
h
h
m
m
l
m
15 20
l
m
m
l
m
h
m
m
l
m
h
h
h
m
m
l
m
15 20
l
l
h
l
l
l
m
m
m
m
m
l
l
8 12
l
m
l
h
l
m
m
m
m
h
h
m
l
l
m
1015
m
l
m
l
l
l
l
l
m
l
l
5 10
RP, radiological protection; DR, diagnostic radiology specialists; NM, nuclear medicine specialists; CDI, interventional cardiologists; MDI, interventionalists
from other specialties; MDX, other medical specialists using x-ray systems; MDN, other medical specialists using nuclear medicine; MDA, other medical
doctors assisting with uoroscopy procedures such as anaesthetists and occupational health physicians; DT, dentists; MD, medical doctors referring for
medical exposures and medical students; l, low level of knowledge indicating a general awareness and understanding of principles; m, medium level of
knowledge indicating a basic understanding of the topic, sucient to inuence practices undertaken; h, high level of detailed knowledge and understanding,
sucient to be able to educate others.
32
Atomic structure, x-ray production, and interaction of radiation

Nuclear structure and radioactivity
Radiological quantities and units
Physical characteristics of x-ray machines
Fundamentals of radiation detection
Principle and process of justication
Fundamentals of radiobiology, biological eects of radiation
Risks of cancer and hereditary disease
Risk of deterministic eects
General principles of RP including optimisation
Operational RP
Particular patient RP aspects
Particular sta RP aspects
Typical doses from diagnostic procedures
Risks from fetal exposure
Quality control and quality assurance
National regulations and international standards
Suggested number of training hours
Category
Training area
33
Atomic structure, x-ray production, and interaction of radiation

Nuclear structure and radioactivity
Radiological quantities and units
Physical characteristics of x-ray machines
Fundamentals of radiation detection
Principle and process of justication
Fundamentals of radiobiology, biological eects of radiation
Risks of cancer and hereditary disease
Risks of deterministic eects
General principles of RP including optimisation
Operational RP
Particular patient RP aspects
Particular sta RP aspects
Typical doses from diagnostic procedures
Risks from fetal exposure
Quality control and quality assurance
National regulations and international standards
Suggested number of training hours
Category
9 MP
10 RDNM
11 ME
12 HCP
13 NU
14 DCP
15 CH
16 RL
17 REG
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
150200
m
m
m
h
h
h
m
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
m
100140
m
m
m
h
h
l
l
m
m
m
m
l
l
h
h
3040
l
m
l
l
m
m
l
m
m
h
h
l
m
l
m
15 20
l
l
l
l
l
m
m
m
m
l
812
l
l
l
l
l
m
l
m
m
m
m
l
l
m
l
1015
m
m
l
h
m
m
m
m
m
h
h
m
m
m
m
1030
m
m
m
l
m
m
m
l
m
h
m
l
m
2040
l
l
m
l
l
m
l
m
m
m
m
m
m
l
l
m
h
15 20
RP, radiological protection; MP, medical physicists specialising in RP, nuclear medicine, and diagnostic radiology; RDNM, radiographers, nuclear medicine
technologists, and x-ray technologists; HCP, healthcare professionals directly involved in x-ray procedures; NU, nurses assisting in x-ray or nuclear medicine
procedures; DCP, dental care professionals including hygienists, dental nurses, and dental care assistants; ME, maintenance engineers and applications
specialists; CH, chiropractors and other healthcare professionals referring for, justifying, and delivering radiography procedures (amount of training depends
on range of tasks performed); RL, radiopharmacists and radionuclide laboratory sta; REG, regulators; l, low level of knowledge indicating a general
awareness and understanding of principles; m, medium level of knowledge indicating a basic understanding of the topic, sucient to inuence practices
undertaken; h, high level of detailed knowledge and understanding, sucient to be able to educate others.
Table 3.2. Recommended radiological protection training requirements for categories of healthcare professionals other than physicians or dentists.
that, for many physicians and their helpers, the danger of stochastic phenomena is
only a second- or third-order concern, in spite of the fact that the consequences,
when they do occur, may result in great suering and loss of life. It is also usually
forgotten that there are certain patients who undergo radiological diagnostic procedures frequently, with the consequence of a much higher than average risk of cancer
induction by medical irradiation. Education and training should aim to achieve the
clear and convincing transfer of the current knowledge and recommendations on the
subject that are accepted at the time. The approach recommended by ICRP for its
RP system is to assume no threshold dose for stochastic eects, and that the risk
of stochastic eects is proportional to organ or tissue dose.
(59) The other extreme in the reaction to radiation exposure, which frequently distorts the reasonable approach to the risk, is usually linked with ignorance of real
consequences and their frequency. The most common example is the exaggeration
of the dangers from intra-uterine exposure related to induction of malformations.
Individuals are often unaware that these eects are deterministic in nature, and so
will not occur when the dose to the embryo is low, as is the case in diagnostic procedures. The whole subject is dealt with thoroughly and clearly in Publication 84
(ICRP, 2000).
(60) Clear presentation of the basic principles of radiobiology and the consequences of exposure to ionising radiation should convince trainees that optimisation
of RP is correct, both logically and ethically. It should also provide convincing evidence that diagnostic and interventional medical procedures utilising ionising radiation provide health benets that usually substantially exceed the potential
detrimental consequences of the radiological risk attributed to them when RP operational principles are applied properly.
3.2. Course topics for medical students and medical practitioners
(61) The challenge for medical education is to identify the information that physicians need to know for everyday practice. However, courses on RP in medical degrees are limited, despite the fact that many of these students will become physicians
using x-ray equipment in their practice, ordering radiation imaging tests, or having
to respond to questions from their patients about the safety of radiation. Education
on RP could be linked to courses on the applications of medical imaging and to
training in interpretation of x-ray images in the medical degree.
(62) A useful orientation on some of the topics to be included in the education programme on RP for medical students is ICRP Supporting Guidance 2, Radiation and
your patient: a Guide for medical practitioners (ICRP, 2001).
(63) The core content for these programmes should include (in addition to other
local requirements):
properties of ionising radiation (x rays, beta particles and electrons);
how to quantify the amount of radiation, and radiological quantities and
units;
radiation mechanisms of interaction with biological materials;
34
classication of radiation eects: deterministic and stochastic;

magnitude of the risks for cancer and hereditary eects;
the use of radiation in diagnostic radiology, CT, interventional radiology,
nuclear medicine, PET/CT, and radiotherapy;
recommendations and legal requirements applying to medical, occupational, and public exposure;
principles and methods of protection of patients and sta in diagnostic
and interventional radiology;
principles of justication of radiological procedures, optimisation of RP,
and dose limitation;
typical doses from medical diagnostic procedures;
application of risk in the justication process;
the importance of the principle of optimisation and the use of diagnostic
reference levels in managing the exposure of patients;
the appropriate role of eective dose in medicine;
doses that can induce deterministic eects (interventional procedures);
the information that dierent imaging techniques can provide and the
relative usefulness of the alternative techniques;
how to obtain guidance on referral criteria for dierent examinations;
the principle of only carrying out diagnostic radiological investigations
when they will inuence patient management;
the risks from radiation therapy, nuclear medicine, and diagnostic and
interventional radiology;
when children and pregnant women require special consideration in diagnostic and interventional procedures;
risks to pregnant women (as patients or sta) and fetuses involved in
nuclear medicine (including therapy), and diagnostic and interventional
radiology;
when patients treated with radiation or undergoing diagnostic nuclear
medicine or PET examinations can endanger other people;
knowledge and skills for counselling patients on radiation risks before and
after medical exposures;
commonly asked questions and suggested answers;
national and international legislation, guidelines, and institutions; and
legal issues and litigation.
3.3. Training recommendations for various categories of medical sta
(64) The dierent groups of topics and the level of training recommended for dierent categories of medically qualied sta and other healthcare professionals are
included in Tables 3.1 and 3.2, respectively. These have been developed based on
existing guidelines, such as those of the European Commission (EC, 2000). The course
content has been expanded and the lists extended to provide a more complete breakdown for categories of sta involved with dierent aspects of radiation exposures.
35
(65) It is recognised that the division of tasks between professionals varies in different countries. Thus training requirements will vary depending on the roles of individuals, and the amount of education and training should be determined by an
assessment of the need and identication of specic training objectives. The groups
identied in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 are exemplars. An individual may be part of more
than one category. For example, an interventional cardiologist who also refers for
and evaluates nuclear cardiology examinations must meet requirements of both
Categories 3 and 5, although there will be common elements that only need to be
covered once.
(66) The areas and levels suggested in the tables should be considered as core
knowledge. More detailed additional training for some of the groups could be
required. The practical application of RP specic to a relevant modality should be
included in operational RP. Training programmes should include procedures that
must be followed after accidental or unintended doses to patients have occurred
from radiological practices, as well as some aspects on ethical issues. A useful
approach in development of the structure for training courses and material may
be to create separate modules relating to the dierent roles of referrer, operator,
and practitioner.
(67) The number of hours indicated in the tables should be considered as an indication of the amount of training. It could contain components from dierent periods
of education and training, such as basic residency programmes and special training
courses.
(68) Medical physicists should know all the training areas at the highest level, in
addition to physics and all relevant aspects of quality assurance programmes, as they
will play a major role in advising others on optimisation of RP and delivering the
training lectures. This group will need to maintain their competence to ensure that
they keep up to date with current knowledge of radiation hazards and risks, developments in techniques and equipment, and legislative requirements. They will
require substantially more training than the other categories considered here.
(69) The length of training programmes (theory and practical work) will depend
on the previous knowledge of radiation physics, radiobiology, etc., among the various groups of health professionals in the dierent countries. A good tool for dening the number of hours needed for training could be the use of guidelines containing
specic educational objectives. The components of the course should be adapted to
achieve the objectives, and realistic times should be determined.
(70) Practical exercises and practical sessions should be included in the RP training
programmes for those directly involved in procedures. A practical session in a clinical installation lasting at least 12 h is recommended for the simplest training programmes, while 2040% of the total time scheduled may be devoted to practical
exercises in more extensive courses.
(71) Some examples of course content for dierent groups involved in medical
exposures are given in Annex A. Radiologists and radiographers involved in paediatric radiology, screening mammography, and CT will require some specic training
in related RP issues for these examinations. Specic training objectives for those
working in paediatric radiology are given in Annex B.
36
3.4. References
EC, 2000. Guidelines for Education and Training in Radiation Protection for Medical Exposures.
Radiation Protection 116. European Commission, Directorate General Environment, Nuclear Safety
and Civil Protection, Luxembourg.
ICRP, 2000. Pregnancy and medical radiation. ICRP Publication 84. Ann. ICRP 30 (1).
ICRP, 2001. Radiation and your patient a guide for medical practitioners. ICRP Supporting Guidance 2.
Ann. ICRP 31 (4).
37
4. TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES AND SUGGESTED METHODOLOGIES

(72) Recommendations on training for a selection of sta categories are made in
this chapter. This is followed by discussion of the focus for courses, and suggestions
about the individuals who would normally deliver the lectures and provide the training. Medical physicists and other practitioners will give much of the RP training, but
the medical and healthcare professionals who perform the radiation procedures will
themselves have an important role. The themes of the method of delivery and the
amount of training are developed, and the need for the continuation of training
throughout the career of each individual as part of their continuing professional
development is discussed.
4.1. Training programmes
(73) Training programmes need to be devised for a variety of dierent categories
of medical and clinical sta with greater or lesser involvement with medical
exposures.
(74) In general, the professions in Categories 1 and 2 (Table 3.1), and 9 and 10
(Table 3.2) shall have formal education in RP and a formal examination system to
test competency before the person is awarded a degree. Formal training in RP with
proven professional competency through professional certication is needed in addition to education before he/she is qualied and entitled to practice the profession and
teach others to practice. Education and training in RP is generally included as part
of the dental degree for Category 7, and may be included in specic training courses
for dental healthcare professionals (Category 14).
(75) For the other medical professionals in Categories 3, 4, and 5 (Table 3.1), and
other healthcare professionals in Category 12 (Table 3.2), who are directly involved in
procedures using radiation, the Commission is aware that there has been a considerable lack of education and training in a large part of the world, and this needs to be
corrected. The Commission recommends that the levels of education and training
should be commensurate with the level of usage of radiation. Physicians, nurses,
and other healthcare professionals (Categories 6 and 13) who are involved in radiation
procedures but do not inuence patient doses directly also need some training in RP.
(76) The RP training needs of Category 8 professionals, physicians who refer for
medical exposures, have remained largely unaddressed. It is unfortunate that RP
training in the past has been linked with sta safety alone, and issues of patient safety
have been neglected. This category of personnel has a direct inuence on patient
safety and their training is important. Among ICRPs principles of RP for justication, optimisation, and dose limitation, prescribing physicians have a signicant role
to play in the justication of medical examinations. Other healthcare professionals
who refer patients for a specic group of exposures require a similar amount of training in RP to professionals in Category 8 relating to those exposures.
(77) There are substantial dierences in the numbers of medical exposures carried
out in developed countries that might be regarded as having a similar level of health
39
care. Although some of these variations may result from the use of more advanced
procedures, more important contributory factors are dierences in the level of control on the prescription and justication of the exposures, and in the methods of
delivery and funding of health care. Surveys have shown that medical referrers have
a relatively poor level of knowledge about RP. It has also been identied that few of
those responsible for prescribing or performing examinations are familiar with the
quantities and units used to specify the amount of radiation or the level of risk from
common procedures. Therefore, the Commission recommends that a stronger
emphasis should be placed on transfer of knowledge of RP and its application to
referrers. This recommendation applies particularly to practitioners and medical specialists outside radiological specialisations. Since all medical professionals are likely
to refer for medical exposures, the Commission recommends that basic education in
RP for physicians (Category 8) should be given as part of the medical degree. The
Commission also urges professional societies for relevant medical and RP sta to
work together to develop continuing education in collaboration with healthcare
providers.
(78) The issue of transfer of knowledge for current medical referrers is more difcult to address. In addition to the basic information on RP and radiation doses
derived from the dierent procedures imparted to all medical students, international
RP organisations and professional bodies are encouraged to facilitate this transfer to
current referrers by making appropriate material readily available and providing
learning opportunities. Possible alternative methods might include distribution of
printed material on RP, perhaps linked to booklets on referral guidelines, promotion
of short e-learning packages aimed specically at referrers, and inclusion of lectures
on RP in conferences for general medical practitioners and other medical specialties.
(79) Maintenance engineers and applications specialists (Category 11) currently
receive some training in RP, but this may be primarily focused on RP of sta; training on RP of patients needs to be expanded, particularly in relation to digital
radiology and new equipment. Principles and procedures for image quality and dose
optimisation should also be emphasised in training of engineers. Some degree of
national co-ordination will be required in order to achieve this.
(80) Chiropractors (Category 15) require training to refer for radiographic exposures, but will require extensive additional theoretical and practical training if they
justify exposures and operate their own x-ray equipment. Consequently, the range
of hours given for this group is larger, and the amount of training obtained needs
to be adjusted accordingly.
(81) Radionuclide laboratory workers (Category 16) should not be confused with
other categories as the risk of radiation exposure is for sta alone rather than both
sta and patients. The RP requirements will be less for work with some radionuclides
than with others, and the amount of education and training needs to be judged on
the basis of merit. In many cases, there may be no need to have personnel monitoring. However, the Commission recommends training for laboratory sta be tailored
to their needs, which may be of rather longer duration as they may be working with
radionuclides on a full time basis, and some may be exempted from personal
40
monitoring because it is inappropriate for the type of radiation emitted from the
radioactive material handled.
(82) Sta from regulatory authorities (Category 17) should be senior medical physicists or equivalent with strong radiation protection competences, but may need to
receive some additional training.
4.2. Delivery of training
(83) The objective of any training in a hospital setting is to acquire knowledge and
skills, and there are many approaches to achieve this. Conventional training programmes utilise a structure that is curriculum based. There is a fundamental dierence between training methodologies employed in non-medical subjects and in
medical, or rather clinical, subjects. While non-medical training, particularly in the
past, has often been based on knowledge transmission, there has always been great
emphasis in clinical training on imparting skills to solve day-to-day problems.
Indeed, most training these days is practice-oriented in many non-medical subject
areas. A training programme in RP for healthcare professionals has to be oriented
towards the type of training to which the target audience is accustomed. Lectures
should deal with essential background knowledge and advice on practical situations,
and the presentations should be tailored to clinical situations to impart skills in the
appropriate context. Practical training should be given in a similar environment to
that in which the participants will be practising, and should provide the knowledge
and skills required for performing clinical procedures. It should deal with the full
range of issues that the trainees are likely to encounter.
(84) Training in RP should be provided by a team of radiological professionals,
each of whom bring their specic knowledge. The primary trainer should be a person
who is an expert in RP in the practice with which he or she is dealing. This will normally be a medical physicist, but radiographers and others have an important role.
The primary trainer should have knowledge about the clinical practice in the use of
radiation, the nature of radiation, the way it is measured, how it interacts with the
tissues, what type of eects it can lead to, principles and philosophies of RP, and
international and national guidelines. Since RP is covered by legislation in almost
all countries of the world, awareness about national legislation and the responsibilities of individuals and organisations is essential.
(85) The RP trainer, in many situations, may lack the knowledge of practicalities
and thus talk from an unrealistic standpoint relating to idealised situations. The foremost point in any successful training is that the trainer should have a clear perception about the practicalities in the work that the training has to cover. It should deal
with what people can practice in their day-to-day work. Some trainers in RP cannot
resist the temptation to deal with basic topics such as radiation units, interaction of
radiation with matter, and even structure of the atom and atomic radiations in more
depth than is appropriate. Such basic topics, while being essential in educational programmes, should only be dealt with to a level that is appropriate for the purpose in
hand. A successful trainer will be guided by the utility of the information to the
41
audience, and not include over-complex denitions purely for academic purposes.
The same applies to regulatory requirements. The trainer should speak the language
of users to convey the necessary information without compromising the regulatory
requirements. It is important that RP trainers update their knowledge continually
to remain abreast of new clinical techniques and technologies. Radiographers and
other health professionals who use radiation in day-to-day work in hospitals and impart the radiation dose to patients have knowledge about practical problems in dealing with patients who may be very ill. They understand problems with the radiation
equipment they deal with, the time constraints for dealing with large numbers of
patients, and the lack of radiation measuring and RP tools, and can make a valuable
contribution to training of other groups. Inclusion of lectures from practising clinicians in courses for Categories 18 is strongly recommended. However, to support
the practising clinician, who may not always have the necessary updated theoretical
and regulatory knowledge, it may be useful for the RP trainer to be on hand during
such lectures to comment and discuss any issues raised.
4.3. Amount of training
(86) Another point to be considered is How much training? Most people and
organisations follow the relatively easy route of prescribing the number of hours.
This report gives some recommendations on the number of hours of education
and training in Tables 3.1 and 3.2, but this should act as a simple guideline rather
than be applied rigidly. This has advantages in terms of implementation of training
and monitoring the training activity. Too much exibility in the amount of training
should be avoided as this could lead to variations in the standard of practice.
(87) The issue of how much training should be linked with prior knowledge of the
trainee and the evaluation methodology. One has to be mindful about the educational objectives of the training, i.e. acquiring knowledge and skills. Many programmes are conned to providing training without assessing the achievement of
the objectives. Although some programmes have pre- and post-training evaluations
to assess the knowledge gained, fewer training programmes assess the acquisition of
practical skills. Using modern methodologies of online examination, results can be
determined instantaneously. It may be appropriate to encourage development of
questionnaire and examination systems that assess knowledge and skills, rather than
prescribing the number of hours of training. Development of evaluation schemes at
national level or by professional bodies is to be encouraged as this would ensure consistency of standards. Due to the magnitude of the requirement for RP training, it
may be worthwhile for organisations to develop online evaluation systems. The
Commission is aware that such online methods are currently available mainly from
organisations that deal with large-scale examinations. The development of selfassessment examination systems is encouraged to allow trainees to use them in the
comfort of the home, on a home PC, or anywhere where the internet is available.
The Commission recommends that evaluation should have an important place.
42
(88) The amount of training should take into account the type of radiation work
undertaken, the level of risk, the frequency of the procedure, and the probability of
occurrence of over-exposures to the patient or to sta. For example, interventional
procedures can deliver skin doses of a few gray to specic patients, and the radiation
doses to patients from CT examinations are relatively high, so the need for RP is
correspondingly greater. Particular consideration should be given to the number
of times a procedure such as CT may be repeated on the same patient. Although
the level of radiation employed in most imaging procedures is lower than the
examples given, care must always be taken to minimise doses as the number of these
procedures performed is far higher. Account should also be taken of changes in the
level of radiation work that can occur fairly quickly for any medical professionals
(e.g. sta movement) and in any medical institution (e.g. introduction of new
services), as this may require additional RP training at certain points during a
clinicians career.
(89) The practice of interventional cardiology involves high localised radiation
doses to patients which may induce skin injuries. Therefore, as the amount of radiation usage in cardiology grows to match that in interventional radiology, the standards of training on radiation eects, radiation physics, and RP in interventional
cardiology should match those for the interventional aspects of radiology.
4.4. Continuing medical education
(90) RP training should be updated when there is a signicant change in radiology
technique or radiation risk, and at intervals not exceeding 36 months. Professional
bodies are encouraged to promote lectures on RP relevant to their specialty in medical congresses to facilitate this. With many medical schools using computer-based
tools for their curricula as well as continuing education, it seems reasonable that
the same approach could also be employed for continuing education on radiation
biology and radiation exposures in medicine. According to studies of medicallyrelated online learning, there are several key factors to consider when designing
material for this environment, including user requirements, available support by
the developing organisation, and adaptability to varying contexts.
43
5. CERTIFICATION OF TRAINING
(91) This chapter gives recommendations for the accreditation of organisations
who give the training, and advice on the certication of individuals. This includes
information on the minimum requirements and the experience necessary for the
course lecturers. The importance of obtaining feedback from participants about such
courses is stressed in order to ensure that the training is suitable for their level of
responsibility. The need to evaluate the knowledge gained from the training is discussed, and examples of tests that could be used are given. It is recommended that
universities and professional scientic societies should collaborate in the organisation and accreditation of courses in order to ensure that appropriate training programmes are in place. The regulatory authorities will have a role in enforcement
to encourage participation. International organisations can provide training material
suitable for use on RP courses. The radiology equipment suppliers are well placed to
play an important role in providing training relating to the eective use of new imaging systems.
5.1. Terminology
(92) Medical and other healthcare professionals involved with medical exposures
will need to attend formal accredited training courses. They may receive some components of training, particularly practical aspects from local centres, and all the
training received should be formally recorded. The formal courses will need to provide certication for the individuals trained.
(93) In the context of this report, the terms accreditation and certication
should be understood in the following way.
(94) Accreditation means that an organisation has been approved by an authorising body to provide training to medical professionals on the RP aspects of the
use of diagnostic or interventional radiation procedures in medicine. The accredited
organisation is required to meet standards that have been set by the authorising body
for such training.
(95) Certication means that an individual medical or clinical professional has
successfully completed training provided by an accredited organisation on the RP
aspects of the diagnostic or interventional procedures to be practised by the individual. The individual must demonstrate competence in the subject matter in a manner
required by the accredited body.
(96) The standards that an accredited organisation must meet, and the manner in
which a certied individual demonstrates competence, will dier for dierent types of
medical and clinical professionals, for dierent medical modalities, for dierent
methods of training, and for dierent countries. This report does not intend to state
the standards (for accreditation) or the methods to demonstrate competency (for certication), but provides guidance on the requirements. The body providing accreditation will need national recognition and should have representation from key
players such as the professional bodies representing radiologists, medical physicists,
radiographers, and physicians.
45
5.2. Criteria for accreditation of organisations to provide training in

radiological protection
5.2.1. Minimum requirements
(97) The minimum requirements for accreditation of a training programme should
take account of all the aspects involved. These should include sucient administrative support; guarantees for the archiving of les, diplomas, etc. for a minimum number of years; sucient didactic support (classroom, audio-visual support, etc.);
teachers qualied in the topics to be taught and with experience in hospital medical
physics; instrumentation for practical exercises; and availability of clinical installations for practical sessions. Practical training should be provided at medical installations, rather than laboratory- or computer-based simulation exercises.
5.2.2. Lecturers experience
(98) Lecturers for the training courses should be competent in RP, which is best
demonstrated by professional certication, state registration, or an equivalent professional recognition system. They must also have experience in RP in medical installations and in practical work in a clinical environment. Often, medical physicists will
lead on this, but other groups such as radiologists, radiographers, and other clinicians with specialist knowledge of techniques may be involved. Trainers participating
in these activities should meet the local requirements and demonstrate sucient
knowledge in the RP aspects of the procedures performed by the medical specialists
involved in the training activity (e.g. to train cardiologists in RP, trainers should
demonstrate previous practical experience in the RP aspects in cardiac laboratories).
This experience may be obtained through observation and working with medical
sta to optimise technique with regard to radiation dose, but it could require the
organisation of some activities to train the trainers in some countries or regions.
Attendance at lectures given by medical sta in RP courses and involvement in discussion during the courses may also be useful components in the development of the
trainers knowledge of techniques and practices.
5.2.3. Feedback from participants
(99) Part of the follow-up to maintain the accreditation of organisations providing
training should be analyses of results from surveys of participant responses at the
end of training courses or training activities. These surveys should include aspects
on the educational content, methodology, training material, practical work, duration
of the training, and appropriateness of the lecturers to train in the specic topics.
5.3. Assessment to conrm successful completion of training
(100) Training activities in RP should be followed by an evaluation of the knowledge acquired from the training programme. This will allow the accreditation of the
46
training for the attendants (required in some countries by the regulatory or health
authorities), and verify and improve the quality and the appropriateness of the lectures and the training programme (audit of the training activity). In some training
institutions, this audit is already included routinely in the quality management
system.
(101) Several evaluation methods can be considered. A simple test of multiplechoice questions may be used to evaluate the knowledge of the attendants and score
some of the key aspects to identify the possible weaknesses in the training programmes. This method has the advantage of needing only 3060 min and of allowing
easy processing of the results with conventional computer software. Other classical
evaluation methods such as written examination, personal interview, automatic computer evaluation answering a set of questions, continuous assessment during the
training programme, etc., can also be considered.
(102) In some countries, a system for accrediting RP training programmes could
be established at national or regional level. This process may be undertaken by
the regulatory or health authorities, with the help of academic institutions (universities) and scientic or professional societies, or by the academic institution or professional societies themselves. A register of accredited bodies should also be established.
(103) For those in Categories 15 and 7 in Table 3.1, and Categories 912 and
1416 in Table 3.2, assessment of competency and practical skills will also be required.
5.3.1. Diplomas
(104) Basic details should be given in the diplomas or certicates awarded to those
attending a training programme in RP. This should include the centre conducting the
training, number of accredited training hours, process of accreditation (examination
or other form of assessment), date of training, and the name of the academic sta
member(s) with responsibility for the training programme.
(105) The state of knowledge of RP evolves, and the radiation techniques used develop, change, and expand with time. Therefore, certication in RP should be limited
in time, and renewal should require sta to participate in periodic refresher activities
and continuing professional development programmes.
5.4. Roles of various organisations in radiological protection training
5.4.1. Universities, training institutions, and scientic societies
(106) Universities, training institutions, and scientic societies may all have an
important role to play in the promotion, organisation, and accreditation of the training activities in RP for medical exposures. They have the scientic knowledge, the
experience, the infrastructure, and the capability to select the best lecturers for such
courses or seminars. The involvement of the relevant medical, radiology, radiography, nuclear medicine, and medical physics scientic societies is a key factor in
attracting dierent clinicians to the training programmes. These societies also have
47
the capability to include refresher courses on RP in their scientic congresses with a

high impact on the audience. Societies of radiology, nuclear medicine, interventional
cardiology, vascular surgery, and other relevant specialties should oer and promote
refresher courses on RP during major scientic congresses.
5.4.2. Regulatory and health authorities
(107) Regulatory and health authorities have the capability to enforce some levels
of RP training and certication for those involved in medical exposures, and to
decide if a periodic update could be necessary for some groups of specialists. They
also have the capacity to direct resources for these training programmes, to promote
and co-ordinate the preparation of training material, and, in some cases, to maintain
a register of the certied professionals.
5.4.3. International organisations
(108) Some international organisations [e.g. ICRP, Intenational Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), World Health Organization (WHO), European Commission
(EC), etc.] can give recommendations on the content (including educational-specic
objectives) and number of hours of recognised training for the dierent professional
groups, and criteria for accreditation and certication. They can also produce or
co-ordinate the preparation of training material, and oer it on their websites.
5.4.4. The radiology industry
(109) The radiology industry has an important role to play in RP training for the
new technologies. The industry should produce training material in parallel with the
introduction of new x-ray or imaging systems to promote the advances in RP of patients, and to alert operators about the impact on patient doses if the new modalities
are not used properly.
5.4.5. Organisation and nancing of training
(110) Critical issues that have to be taken into account by the regulatory bodies
and health authorities when requiring certication in RP for medical professionals
are the available infrastructure for organisation of the training programmes and
the nancial requirements.
(111) In some countries or regions, the co-operation of international organisations
(e.g. IAEA, WHO, Pan American Health Organization, EC, etc.) could be helpful in
initiating the activities through the organisation of pilot courses and provision of
training materials to train the trainers. Later, RP training could be extended with
the co-operation of universities, research centres, and scientic or professional societies (e.g. medical physics, radiology, nuclear medicine, cardiology, etc.).
48
(112) If certication in RP is required for practices such as interventional cardiology, the certicate should be obtained before a professional is involved in practising
the specialty at a specic centre. If the requirement is introduced in a country once
the professionals are already working in the specialty, the dierent healthcare providers will need to make the resources available to train their own professionals in
RP.
49

Icrp 113

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Icrp 113

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Icrp 113

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.

ICRP Publication 113

ICRP Publication 113

stochastic eects cannot be eliminated totally, so the appropriate approach is only to

ICRP Publication 113

 Interventionalists with heavy procedure workloads may be exposed to

ICRP Publication 113

 other physicians that utilise ionising radiation modalities in their

2. HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS TO BE TRAINED

2.1. Consequences of failure to deliver training in radiological protection

ICRP Publication 113

dedicated report on the proper management of radiation dose in digital radiology,

 Category 8 medical referrers: physicians who request examinations and

ICRP Publication 113

to be avoided. In Publication 85 (ICRP, 2000), ICRP proposed a second level of RP

Interventional procedures are complex and demanding. They tend to be very

of education in RP needs to be given to present and future potential referrers with

ICRP Publication 113

3. PRIORITIES IN TOPICS TO BE INCLUDED IN TRAINING

ICRP Publication 113

Atomic structure, x-ray production, and interaction of radiation

Atomic structure, x-ray production, and interaction of radiation

ICRP Publication 113

 classication of radiation eects: deterministic and stochastic;

ICRP Publication 113

4. TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES AND SUGGESTED METHODOLOGIES

ICRP Publication 113

ICRP Publication 113

ICRP Publication 113

5.2. Criteria for accreditation of organisations to provide training in

ICRP Publication 113

the capability to include refresher courses on RP in their scientic congresses with a

You might also like

Interventionalists with heavy procedure workloads may be exposed to

other physicians that utilise ionising radiation modalities in their

Category 8 medical referrers: physicians who request examinations and

classication of radiation eects: deterministic and stochastic;