April 13th: CPD preferences for Radiographers

The April topic for the #MedRadJclub was continuous professional development (CPD) preferences for radiographers. Participants discussed the (free open access) article “A survey of radiographers’ confidence and self-perceived accuracy in frontline image interpretation and their continuing educational preferences” from JMRS which examines confidence in image interpretation and learning preferences for radiographers. The two lead authors, Mike Neep (@MikeNeep) and Tom Steffens (@TomsteffTom) were online to answer questions and Adam Westerink (@adamwesterink) was moderating.

The Storify transcript is available here with analytics from Symplur and keyhole.co included at the bottom.

Check out our guest blog by Louise Coleman (@LouiseC_SoR ), Education and Accreditation Officer at the Society and College of Radiographers (UK) on “CPD, learning preferences and radiographers” written to complement this month’s journal club.

Study Description This Australian study examines the continuing professional development (CPD) preferences of a cohort of qualified diagnostic radiographers and their confidence and self-perceived accuracy in providing detection and description of traumatic abnormalities. Intensive (short, condensed) and non-intensive (frequent, smaller) learning strategies are compared with the advantages and disadvantages highlighted using a semi-structured questionnaire.

Themes:

  • T1 = What is the role of CPD to support these types of initiatives?
  • T2 = What did the results show?
  • T2a = Are the findings of this study generalisable to CPD required for other forms of practice? Other Med Rad disciplines? Other countries?
  • T2b = What are the advantages and disadvantages of intensive vs. non-intensive CPD for these types of initiatives?
  • T2c = Why no significant difference in CPD preferences?
  • T3 = Strengths and limitations of this study?
  • T4 = Future directions?

Suggested reading

Matthews et al. Blending work-integrated learning with distance education in an Australian radiation therapy advanced practice curriculum Radiography 20;3:277-82

Leishman Can skeletal image reporting be taught online: Perspectives of experienced reporting radiographers? Radiography 19;2:104-12

American Society of Radiologic Technologists CE Guidance

Australian Institute of Radiography CPD Requirements 

Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists Best Practice Guideline on CPD

College of Radiographers CPD Requirements (UK)

Health and Care Professions Council Requirements (UK)

European Federation of Radiographer Societies CPD Guidelines

New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technologists CPD Requirements

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “April 13th: CPD preferences for Radiographers

  1. Pingback: SoMe to enrich radiographic practice: are we green for go? | Word of Mouth Mammography e Network

  2. T2 = Results of the study
    Neep et al. reported that More radiographers reported a strong preference for non-intensive CPD for image interpretation training (40/73 vs. 25/73) although no statistically significant difference was found (Wilcoxon signed-rank test p=0.11)

    T2a = Generalisability of findings
    As identified in the guest blog by Louise Coleman and evidenced in the #MedRadJclub chat, it would appear that there is no distinct preference for intensive or non-intensive radiographer CPD, and that this is consistent across professional and national boundaries. In fact, radiographers may prefer each learning style depending on what is being learnt; intensive for new or complex topics yet non-intensive to consolidate existing skills and vice versa.

    T2b = Advantages & Disadvantages of different CPD learning methods
    As outlined in the study several key themes emerged

    Non-Intensive
    Advantages = consolidated learning between sessions, gradual learning, maintaining concentration
    Disadvantages = long term commitment, difficulty in scheduling for practitioners

    Intensive
    Advantages = easier to attend
    Disadvantages = too much information to digest, concentration required for two days

    T3 = Strengths & Limitations of the study
    The high response rate for the online survey (68%) is a strength of the study and allows firm conclusions to be drawn about the learning preferences for this cohort of qualified Australian radiographers when developing image interpretation skills.

    A limitation was the selection of participant departments, 4 metropolitan hospitals in Brisbane, Australia. As the survey was distributed electronically, further research could involve a wider cross-section of department types; rural, remote and international. Distance learning may be the preference for radiographers isolated by considerable distance from intensive learning opportunities.

    T4 = Future directions
    As indicated in the limitations of this study, the survey could be distributed to a wider variety of radiology departments. Further work could also examine the CPD preferences of other radiographers (radiation therapists, sonographers, nuclear medicine technologists) and for a wider range of learning. This type of analysis could help paint a global picture of CPD preferences of radiographers.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s