Imaging techniques for sacroiliac joint injections

Injections into the sacroiliac joint for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes have become commonplace. There have been advances in the use of regenerative therapies other than prolotherapy, such as platelet-rich plasma and stem cells. Prior to the introduction of image-guided techniques, blind injections were performed. However, data have consistently shown that without image guidance, injections failed to be accurately placed within the joint. Therefore, the use of image guidance, whether by computed tomography, fluoroscopy, or ultrasound, is imperative to ensure accurate placement of the injectate. This chapter discusses these three types of imaging techniques for sacroiliac joint injections.

Diagnostic radiographer advanced clinical practice in the United Kingdom – A national cross-sectional survey

Objectives: To survey the diagnostic radiography workforce in the United Kingdom (UK) at an organisational level to ascertain the scope of advanced practice and compliance with Health Education England standards for multiprofessional advanced clinical practice (ACP). Methods: 174 diagnostic imaging departments were invited to participate in a cross-sectional electronic survey focused upon advanced level practice and their educational and accreditation expectations (October–December 2019). Breast imaging, computed tomography, fluoroscopy, interventional radiology, lithotripsy, magnetic resonance imaging and projectional radiography were included. Results: A total of 97 responses were received, of which 79 were eligible for inclusion (45%). Respondents reported advanced-level practice roles across all imaging modalities, which included clinical reporting, procedural-based and combined roles. Radiograph and mammogram reporting were most prevalent (95 and 67% of Trusts), with fluoroscopy the most frequent procedure-only role (25%). Only 39% of trusts required adherence to the four pillars of ACP within job descriptions, and only 12% requiring a full Masters qualification. Conclusions: Diagnostic radiographer reporting and procedure-based roles in the NHS are varied and widespread. However, inconsistencies in fulfilment against the expected standards for advanced practice exist. Realignment of advanced-level roles to delineate enhanced and advanced clinical practice may ensure consistency between roles and professions. A requirement for accreditation as an advanced (clinical) practitioner with adherence to advanced practice requirements could therefore provide value to accreditation for both individual practitioners and Trusts. Advances in knowledge: Within the UK, diagnostic radiographer roles previously self-identified as advanced-level practice may be termed enhanced practice when not adhering to expected ACP standards.

THE EFFICACY OF RADPAD AS A RADIATION PROTECTION TOOL IN CT FLUOROSCOPY GUIDED LUNG BIOPSIES

Computed tomography fluoroscopy is now the preferred technique for percutaneous lung biopsies. However, concern regarding operator and patient radiation dose remains, which warrants further exploration into dose optimisation tools. This phantom-study aims to assess the dose reduction capabilities of RADPAD, a single-use patient drape designed to decrease staff exposure to scattered radiation. Dosemeters at the waist and eye levels were used to determine the whole-body and lens exposure during simulated lung biopsy procedures while using RADPAD and other combinations of personal protective equipment. RADPAD resulted in a 36% and 38% dose reduction for whole-body and eye exposure, respectively. However, when used in combination with radioprotective eyewear and aprons, RADPAD did not reduce the radiation dose further. Consequently, the use of standard personal protective equipment is a more cost-effective option for staff dose reduction. RADPAD is useful in the reduction of radiation dose to unprotected regions.