Professional Mandate in Radiology - Research Paper Example

Research Is a Professional Mandate in Radiology Student Name Course Name Tutor Date Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Research Is a Professional Mandate in Radiology 3 Introduction 3 Relevance of research 3 Research as a mandate in radiology 5 Also referred to as a full in-depth analysis on an area, Research is viewed as a very necessary procedure in a variety of fields, especially the scientific fields, involving the science of radiology. The role and importance of research in the field of radiology has therefore been quite easily understood as well as realized by the radiology scientists, this is even very clear as the scientists have realized its obvious intimate synergistic link with technology. As such therefore it is a way through which the radiologists uphold the leadership of scientific inventions and utilization (Hunt 2004, 30). 5 Tool for protection of radiology practice 5 Deduction of cautious conclusions 6 Provision of practice guidelines 6 Eliminating theories and assumptions 7 Relevance in departmental conferences 7 Transformations and development 8 Encouraging discoveries 9 Advancement in previous knowledge 9 Rare radiology information 10 Provision of general information 11 Reduction in operation costs 11 Time-saving 12 Conclusion 13 Bibliography 14 Research Is a Professional Mandate in Radiology Introduction Radiology is a term used to refer to the area of medicine that is concerned with the use of radiation for both diagnosis (diagnostic imaging) as well as treatment (through radiation therapy) of ailment. Previously the x-rays were applied in diagnosis while some ionizing radiations like the gamma rays were applied in the treatment of ailments. Currently, with the advancement in technology, some other diagnostic methods have been introduced to the world of radiology, like isotope scanning and the use of the nonionizing radiation (the ultrasound, radioimmunoassay and the magnetic resonance imaging).there is also further development of chemotherapeutic drugs as well as the radioactive hormones in the treatment of cancer (Fryback 1993, 397). Relevance of research Since radiology is among the main technologically intensive scientific fields and the fastest growing medical discipline, it greatly depends on research in order to continue to be clinically relevant and applicable. In case there had not been the development of the new modalities including the positron emissions and computerized topographies (developed 30 years back), the general medical field including the area of radiology would have been completely different right now. Just as well, in case the radiologic science fails to succeed in the coming years, the existence of radiology, as one of the medical disciplines, is going to be under threats. When the activities of the radiologic research come to a halt, radiology starts turning to be not only irrelevant, but obsolete too (Moorefield 1993, 324) . Radiologic science, even as such, cannot be compared to a machine or device that continuously churn out fresh discoveries and ideas when its parts are properly maintained or when there is a continuous power source. Radiologic research is as a result of commitment and innovation, and its only when bright people are lured into this discipline will it continue to exist and perform better. In case it fails to lure the potential bright recruits in to this investigative profession, then the radiologic research, hence the radiologic practice will be faced with great difficulties (Sackett 1996, 76). The role of research in radiology therefore, as this work elaborates, is very fundamental. Research as a mandate in radiology Also referred to as a full in-depth analysis on an area, Research is viewed as a very necessary procedure in a variety of fields, especially the scientific fields, involving the science of radiology. The role and importance of research in the field of radiology has therefore been quite easily understood as well as realized by the radiology scientists, this is even very clear as the scientists have realized its obvious intimate synergistic link with technology. As such therefore it is a way through which the radiologists uphold the leadership of scientific inventions and utilization (Hunt 2004, 30). Tool for protection of radiology practice When viewed from a more usual perspective, research can be considered as a tool for not only protecting, but also expanding growth in the practice of radiology, For instance, by considering the way that researches carried out by radiologists in therapies that are minimally invasive, and the development of such techniques, has enabled the radiologists to continuously play a dominant and important role in the field of radiology. Currently, although, many scientists have developed a belief that the surgical specialties pose a great risk to the area of the interventional radiology as they present the threat of ‘swallowing it up’. Active research carried out by radiologists, as well as continued improvement in the areas of innovation, therefore has a fundamental role of enabling radiology, as a scientific field, maintain its basic function and get its areas protected from further attrition (McNeil 1990, 598). Deduction of cautious conclusions It is also wise to consider that research is very necessary in the practice of good medicine since cautious conclusions have to be drawn from experiences that sometimes may be limited as well as subjective. For instance, the diagnosis of a pericardial tamponade case from the computed tomography (CT) findings can not imply that it is the best choice of the imaging modality for the particular condition; neither does it imply that every patient who is at the danger of contracting the pericardial tamponade condition should be undertaken through the computed tomography (CT). As such, good medical practice considers evidence-based decisions as very necessary, of which research provides the method for the acquisition of this evidence, synthesis of the evidence, and how the evidence is to be implemented (Obuchowski1997, 15). Provision of practice guidelines In some occasions the research pattern always gets codified so as to form practice guidelines and then this gets distributed to other practitioners for the benefit of radiology professionals. If the research is nicely conducted, its value to the global health endevours, mostly in the area of radiology, is evidently felt since, apart from being the foundation of the development of programmes and policies worldwide, research can also be used for provision of health programmes that are globally effective (Hillman 1999, 643). Eliminating theories and assumptions Because of its empirical nature, as opposed to the theorizing of what people believe is effective or what is believed to be functional, research has great effectiveness within the radiology practice. The researchers actually go direct to the field and devise studies which provide hard data for which the policy makers in radiology could have their decisions based on. Best still, some properly and adequately conducted radiologic researches always provide results that peers in radiology can examine, continuously provide methods that may be replicated in radiology and also provides more knowledge about radiology that is applicable to the real-world situations. Therefore the researchers often work together and cooperate to increase knowledge on the way radiologic issues can be better approached, even though there is still need for more effort in carrying out research activities so as to develop the practice guidelines necessary in radiology (Wood 1999, 636). Relevance in departmental conferences It is also evident that research in radiology is very crucial during the departmental conferences, These departmental conferences might sometimes be very frequent, for instance when they are carried out monthly, where the role of research is felt during the interactions between the residents and the researchers, as the researchers provide opportunities for the residents to ask a great variety of questions concerning radiologic researches including formulation of research questions, funding of researches, lessons from the research, duration of the research and the influence of the research on the clinical care. This has effect of enabling the residents to have more knowledge about radiologic research and appreciate radiology, apart from developing interests in the field of radiology (Hillman 1998, 324). Transformations and development Research is fundamental and has transformed to a great extent the field of radiology, an example of how this has been done is in consideration of the way it has led to the development of medical facilities that enhance radiology, improved imaging techniques, and made easier the task of the radiologists. This is very crucial to radiologists since they have to be accurate and well timed, especially considering that both treatment and imaging using radiology poses great health risks to both the patient and the medical practitioner. Such improvements include the development process of the Cardiac imaging which has passed through a lot of progress during the past decades to become of better standard, mainly due to research (Kent 1998, 411). The imaging techniques have been improved and made better that they require very minimal human labour to operate. This is because, after further research in radiology, more better and efficient machines have been developed for perfect imaging. The coronary angiography development as well as the development of the imaging techniques that are noninvasive (for heart imaging), like the echocardiography, multidetector CT, and Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has led to the diagnosis and also monitoring of the cardiovascular illness in a way that is very accurate. The latest developments in technology have transformed the functions of the cardiologists and the radiologists in the clinical imaging, especially for the heart (Burg 2009, 3). Encouraging discoveries Research plays a pivotal role in radiology considering the constant change of knowledge in the world. With growth in various technologies, there has been a resultant increase in knowledge hence more and more information concerning illnesses and the materials used in treating such problems have increased. Radiology is no exception since it requires up-to-date information to operate safely, especially because it uses invisible radiations that might add other complications to the patient if exposed accidently or if not administered in the right doses. These discoveries have been made possible through constant research on the effects of exposure to a continuous or extreme stream of rays from the imaging devices (Tanner 2004, 938). Advancement in previous knowledge As earlier discussed, knowledge keeps changing. In view of this, research is very mandatory to the clinical practice of radiology considering that research activities carried out within the discipline help a lot in advancing the earlier knowledge about radiology hence keeps scientists updated on the latest radiology trends, which has a corresponding adoption of new modalities to well equip the discipline (Hillman 1992,315) . There is still evidence of lack of enough information in the radiology practice to make the practice to be able to deal with every problem that is presented to it, which unfortunately always become difficult due to insufficient information and as such research becomes very necessary in the provision of the lacking information. Radiology as a whole greatly depends on the accumulation of such information to enhance its operations and performance. Rare radiology information The search for better medical alternatives in the field of radiology, the changes in the radiology profession and also the development of technologies that are very advanced in the field of medicine have had a profound effect on the radiologists since there has been need for them to look beyond their professional expertise in order to provide better and competitive health care services, apart from catching up with the growing technology (Nagy1998, 811). Most of the information that is required in such cases is often derived from the information that has already been published. However such information is rare and hard to come by, apart from constantly undergoing changes in the skills that are useful in the application of such information. Hence as such the radiologists need to find the information that is relevant to their practice and use it in their setting. In order to find the necessary information therefore, the radiologists often carry out research activities (Van Moorsel 2005, 150). Science of Radiology does not also require the radiologists to keep referring to the published information for more knowledge about diseases and treatment and as such depends much on the information from the actual field since it has also been proven that there are some illnesses that actually are developing resistance to some treatments and as such rely on much research in order to find treatments. Besides, research findings have always been found contradictory to the published information, signifying a transition in knowledge about radiology (Rubenstein 1993, 782). Provision of general information Radio technologists are sometimes faced with various situations daily, the situations in which much information may be very necessary. Most of the time these scientists look to other radio technologists for suggestions and guidance on tackling the particular problems. Such problems can vary right from the most appropriate procedure or technique to apply to a given pathology to the comfort of the radio technologists in relation to the environment. In case such information is derived from a colleague, then the information might have its basis on the personal experience of one individual. This information then might not be effective, hence research is necessary throughout (Siegelman 1997, 654). In case the difficulty faced by the radiologists is a common problem found throughout the department then the necessity of transformations within the department’s policy or even protocol is inevitable. In such situations any radio technologist who is well equipped with enough new knowledge and precise data might very influential and helpful in dealing with the catastrophe and provide the much needed change within the department. Such information, which is derived from research, has great benefits to the entire department (Shanahan 2007, 193). Reduction in operation costs Research as such is also considered as very important in reducing the operation costs within the radiology discipline as much information is gathered first before any financial transactions and dispensations are carried out, this is opposed to a situation where there has not been any research carried out on any of the problems facing the discipline and as such financial obligations and requirements often become higher (Borkowski 1995, 296). When research has been carried out on a particular problem the funds are directed according to plan which also the radiologists have approval and confidence that will reduce or eliminate the problem. Without research on such problems more money could be wasted on continuous use of non effective methods to handle the problem. Besides, radiology requires much research to avoid the higher costs associated with its operations since the practice has to be able to apply modern technology to its normal routines, of which without research such technologies would not have been all that effective hence operation costs would have been very high (Nash 1996, 27) . Time-saving Time is a very important factor to be considered in any clinical practice, this is even more important in the radiology practice since every radiation indicated for a patient has to be keenly timed to avoid worsening the already existing condition of the patients undergoing the imaging, since the radiations would greatly harm the patient if not properly timed. Such practice and knowledge, however, has only been made possible through researching on the effects of overexposure to radiations. Still, more research helps in the reduction of time spent in solving a particular problem since the root cause of the problem is determined first before any necessary action is taken. Once the problem has been determined and its root cause found, the radiologists then easily find the solutions to the problem that would have taken a longer period to solve if the research would have not been carried out (Blackmore 1997, 79). Conclusion In conclusion, the value of research in the decision making process within the radio technology practice is very clear, as has been indicated, mostly as it provides the foundation for the practice, without which there could have existed various problems in the practice, ranging from poor decisions, ineffective treatment methods, improper handling of treatment cases, to investing of money and time in ineffective methods or solutions. As such therefore, reaching to a constructive conclusion in the practice would have not been possible, especially considering its values as given above. Radiology practice therefore relies much on the research-based decisions to come up with effective methods of handling the existing difficulties within the practice, also considering the constant changes necessary in the practice. More researchers, however, are still needed in the practice so as to fill the knowledge gap existing in the practice and provide the actual information required for the developments necessary in the radiology practice. Bibliography Hillman, Bruce. “American College of Radiology Imaging Network: new national cooperative group for conducting clinical trials of medical imaging technologies.” Radiology 213(1999): 641-645. Obuchowski, N.A. “Testing for equivalence of diagnostic tests” AJR 168(1997):13–17. Fryback D.G. “The General Electric-Association of University Radiologists Radiology Research Academic Fellowship (GERRAF): an industry–academic collaboration to improve clinical research in radiology”. Invest Radiol 28(1993):394-400. Sackett, D. “Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't.” BMJ 312 (1996):75-77. Moorefield, J.M. “The radiology relative value scale: its development and implications. “ Radiology 87(1993):318-327. Wood, B. “What's the evidence?” Radiology 213 (1999):635–637. Hillman, Bruce. “The RSNA-AUR-ARRS Introduction to Research program for 2nd year radiology residents: effect on career choice and early academic performance.” Radiology 209 (1998):323-326. Kent D.L. “Magnetic resonance of the brain and spine: is clinical efficacy established after the first decade?” Ann Intern Med 108 (1998): 402-424. Burg, Matthias et al. “MR Angiography of Peripheral Arterial Stents: In Vitro Evaluation of 22 Different Stent Types.” Volume 2011 (2009):3-4. Tanner, A. “Readiness for evidence-based practice: information literacy needs of nurses in the United States.” Medinfo 12 (2004):936-940. Rubenstein, L. “Who pays for published research?” JAMA 269(1993):779-786. Siegelman, S. Improving radiology research methods: what is being asked and who is being studied? Radiology 205 (1997):652–656. Shanahan, M. “Information literacy skills of undergraduate medical radiation students.” Radiography 13 (2007):190-197. Nash, Kent. “Research funding programs that work: a survey of the RSNA Research and Education Fund award recipients.” Radiology 200 (1996): 25-30. Borkowski, A. “Impact of unfunded research in medicine, pathology, and surgery. “ South Med J 88 (1995):294-300. Blackmore C.C. “Methodologic evaluation of the radiology cost-effectiveness literature.” Radiology 203 (1997): 87-91. McNeil B.J. “Collaborative evaluations of diagnostic tests: experience of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group.” Radiology 175 (1990):563-580. Nagy E.C. “The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging: questions and answers.” Acad Radiol 5 (1998):809-814. Van Moorsel, G. “Library sponsored instruction improves core informatics competencies among allied health students: a research-based case study.” J Allied Health (34)2005:147-153. Hunt, F. “Best practices in information literacy.” Libraries and the Acad 4 (2004):27-40. Hillman, B.J. “Putman CE. Fostering research by radiologists: recommendations of the 1991 summit meeting.” Radiology 182(1992):312-318. Read More

The role of research in radiology therefore, as this work elaborates, is very fundamental. Research as a mandate in radiology Also referred to as a full in-depth analysis on an area, Research is viewed as a very necessary procedure in a variety of fields, especially the scientific fields, involving the science of radiology. The role and importance of research in the field of radiology has therefore been quite easily understood as well as realized by the radiology scientists, this is even very clear as the scientists have realized its obvious intimate synergistic link with technology.

As such therefore it is a way through which the radiologists uphold the leadership of scientific inventions and utilization (Hunt 2004, 30). Tool for protection of radiology practice When viewed from a more usual perspective, research can be considered as a tool for not only protecting, but also expanding growth in the practice of radiology, For instance, by considering the way that researches carried out by radiologists in therapies that are minimally invasive, and the development of such techniques, has enabled the radiologists to continuously play a dominant and important role in the field of radiology.

Currently, although, many scientists have developed a belief that the surgical specialties pose a great risk to the area of the interventional radiology as they present the threat of ‘swallowing it up’. Active research carried out by radiologists, as well as continued improvement in the areas of innovation, therefore has a fundamental role of enabling radiology, as a scientific field, maintain its basic function and get its areas protected from further attrition (McNeil 1990, 598). Deduction of cautious conclusions It is also wise to consider that research is very necessary in the practice of good medicine since cautious conclusions have to be drawn from experiences that sometimes may be limited as well as subjective.

For instance, the diagnosis of a pericardial tamponade case from the computed tomography (CT) findings can not imply that it is the best choice of the imaging modality for the particular condition; neither does it imply that every patient who is at the danger of contracting the pericardial tamponade condition should be undertaken through the computed tomography (CT). As such, good medical practice considers evidence-based decisions as very necessary, of which research provides the method for the acquisition of this evidence, synthesis of the evidence, and how the evidence is to be implemented (Obuchowski1997, 15).

Provision of practice guidelines In some occasions the research pattern always gets codified so as to form practice guidelines and then this gets distributed to other practitioners for the benefit of radiology professionals. If the research is nicely conducted, its value to the global health endevours, mostly in the area of radiology, is evidently felt since, apart from being the foundation of the development of programmes and policies worldwide, research can also be used for provision of health programmes that are globally effective (Hillman 1999, 643).

Eliminating theories and assumptions Because of its empirical nature, as opposed to the theorizing of what people believe is effective or what is believed to be functional, research has great effectiveness within the radiology practice. The researchers actually go direct to the field and devise studies which provide hard data for which the policy makers in radiology could have their decisions based on. Best still, some properly and adequately conducted radiologic researches always provide results that peers in radiology can examine, continuously provide methods that may be replicated in radiology and also provides more knowledge about radiology that is applicable to the real-world situations.

Therefore the researchers often work together and cooperate to increase knowledge on the way radiologic issues can be better approached, even though there is still need for more effort in carrying out research activities so as to develop the practice guidelines necessary in radiology (Wood 1999, 636).

Read More