A Report compiled by Cardiff University for the Society and College of Radiographers:

Information Management and

Technology (IM&T) Survey

1

Contents Page

................................................................................................................Contents 1

.............................................................................................Glossary 3

.............................................................................................Executive Summary 4

i. .............................................................................................Background 4

ii. ........................................................................Engagement in clinical systems 4

iii. .................................Engagement in general Information Technology systems 5

iv. ...............................................................................Conclusions ………………. 5

v. Recommendations ………………………………………………………………….5

................................................Chapter 1: Background and nature of the research 7

.............................................................................................1.1 Introduction 7

.............................................................................................1.2 Background 7

.........................................................................................1.3 Aims … 9

.............................................................................................1.4 Method 9

............................................................................................Chapter 2: Results 11

............................................................................................2.1 Informants 11

.........................................2.2 Information Management & Technology: Ability 12

.............................2.3 Information Management and Technology: Confidence 13

..................2.4 Information Management and Technology: Work Applications 14

2.4.1 Importance ............................................................................................ 14

2.4.2 E mail ............................................................................................ 15

............................................................................................2.4.3 Internet 17

............................................................................................2.4.4 Word 18

.................2.5 Information Management and Technology: Home Applications 19

2.5.1 Engagement ............................................................................................ 19

.................................................................................2.5.2 Access to the Internet 20

...................................................................................2.6 Clinical Applications 21

2

............................................................................................2.6.1 Engagement 21

............................................................................................2.6.2 Confidence 23

......................................................................2.6.3 NHS vs Independent Sector 31

.................................................................2.7 Data Transmission and Storage 33

...............2.8 Barriers to the use of Information Management and Technology 34

...............................................................................2.9 Education and Training 35

............................................................................................2.9.1 Qualifications 35

......................2.9.2 General Information Management and Technology Training 36

......................................................................2.9.3 Clinical Applications Training 38

..................2.9.4 Barriers to Information Management and Technology Training 43

............................................................................................2.10 The Future 44

............................................................................................Chapter 3: Conclusions 48

..................................................................................Chapter 4: Recommendations 51

...................................................................................References 52

..................................................................Appendix I: Project Group Membership 53

...................................................................................Appendix 2: Questionnaire 55

3

Glossary

AfC Agenda for Change

CLAIT Computer Literacy & Information Technology

CPD Continuing Professional Development

CT Computed tomography

e-KSF Electronic Knowledge and Skills Framework

EPR Electronic Patient Record

ECDL European Computer Driving Licence

HIS Hospital Information System

IM&T Information Management and Technology

IMRT Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

IT Information Technology

MRI Magnetic Resonance Imaging

PACS Picture Archive and Communication System

PDP Personal Development Plan

RIS Radiology Information System

SCoR Society and College of Radiographers

SoR Society of Radiographers

USB Universal Serial Bus

4

Executive Summary

i. BackgroundAn audit was undertaken to identify the current Information Management and Technology (IM&T) knowledge and skills of the radiography workforce on behalf of The Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR). An on-line survey was completed by radiographers, academics, educators and radiography managers, primarily employed in the NHS, the independent sector or higher education in the United Kingdom (UK). A response rate of 1443 was achieved.

ii. Engagement in clinical systemsRadiography has become dependent on many IM&T systems to improve workflow within a clinical care setting. The advent of Picture Archive and Communication Systems (PACS) and its continuing development to facilitate the electronic patient record (EPR) has undoubtedly improved the efficiency of clinical communication and decision making. There remain challenges however, to integrate all IM&T systems and to ensure their usability. Among those challenges is ensuring that all radiographers possess the appropriate skills and to make sure that there is adequate training to cope with new technological advances.

When informants were asked about their confidence in using clinical applications, they reported high confidence for applications that were used daily (e.g. PACS, HIS, RIS, patient management record systems). Conversely where applications were only rarely used, confidence was much lower, for example using on line test results applications. When considering confidence, this also appeared to be dependent on Agenda for Change bandings with those at bands 8 or above showing greater confidence than those in the lower bandings. It was likely that this confidence had developed from the level and degree of engagement, since those in higher bandings demonstrated greater usage than those in the lower bandings. Additionally, those informants in the higher bandings are required to manage and solve problems associated with IM&T, have responsibilities to train others and are more likely to have management responsibilities requiring greater engagement in audit and databases. Whilst most radiographers rated their IM&T skills as good to excellent, there were some radiographers who felt under confident and that they lacked the ability to carry out their roles efficiently. This may be linked to a reported lack of formal training, with most skills being self-taught.

The study demonstrated that some radiographers were unaware of issues relating to data protection and governance, there is therefore a requirement to make sure that all radiographers are fully competent in data governance issues in the near future.

iii. Engagement in general Information Technology systems

5

Engagement in general IM&T systems was found to be varied with applications such as email, internet, intranet and word processing being the most commonly used. There was recognition that IM&T plays an important role in the workplace, although there was evidence that IM&T is not fully exploited in terms of CPD. When asked about their level of confidence in using IM&T, the majority of informants felt they were fairly confident, with only 1.5% indicating they were not confident at all and 9.5% indicating they were very confident The findings show that there is high confidence for applications where there was high usage (e.g. weekly or more) namely e mail, internet, intranet and word processing. There was a wider distribution of confidence levels for applications such as PowerPoint and databases which were not used as frequently. Some IM&T applications were not widely used in a clinical setting, such as PowerPoint. The majority of informants (742) had no qualifications in IM&T, had not received any formal training in general IM&T applications and were primarily self taught. Since a certificate of attendance is not recognised as an award ECDL was the qualification held by the most informants.

iv. Conclusions One of the main themes that emerged from this study was the lack of structured training accessible to informants. Indications were that this mainly related to staff being released from departments, individuals own clinical workloads and financing. When general IM&T training did take place this was primarily at an introductory level and took place in a group which matched with the preferred format for this type of application. The other significant point to note is that when training did take place for clinical applications it was mainly informal / ad hoc, except for HIS and RIS where informants had participated in small group training or one to one training. It appears from the findings that this kind of ad hoc training is appropriate for applications that are used on a daily basis as long as ongoing support and advice are available. However for applications that are not used frequently it appears ad hoc training was not sufficient. Some informants did express a need for more high level training so that they could understand the systems more fully and would be able to troubleshoot problems arising. The preferred method of training for most applications was one to one or group training. Specialist training was only requested by a small number of informants. In addition remote learning was not rated as a popular method to learn.

v. Recommendations IM&T is an evolving discipline in radiography, the scope of practice ranges from general IM&T skills to in-depth knowledge of specialist clinical applications. Therefore the workforce needs to be adaptable to change and IM&T skills need to be acquired and updated. In order to enhance the skills of the workforce and improve patient care there needs to be more IM&T training. There is a need for a standardised form of training involving generic and radiography specific IM&T skills, integrated into undergraduate radiography courses

6

initially but also maintained by the NHS in ongoing specialised training. IM&T skills for new graduates need to be identified, and these skills should be explicit within undergraduate curricula, at least to ECDL level. Educational placements offering IM&T experiences need to be identified for higher education students, with in-service education required for HIS, RIS and PACs. More work and investment is needed to support a clinical and cultural change. It is acknowledged radiographers require basic IM&T skills (at least the ECDL) but they need to be encouraged to achieve at least a basic level of competence. The benefits to an organisation of staff training, education and qualifications in IM&T should be acknowledged and addressed with adequate resources to ensure radiographers are equipped with the necessary IM&T skills to ensure optimum service delivery and patient care. Further work is required to map IM&T competencies across bands and specialties and where necessary, accredited courses developed. Key staff must understand how IM&T can benefit patient care in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and safety, and how to apply knowledge and skills within their area of expertise. In the future advanced IM&T skills may need to be recognised as an area of role development / advanced practice. Generally informants also felt that they would prefer training in small groups or one to one training delivered on site. In addition, although the use of Smartcard technology was found to be low, transmission of data was widespread within trusts and therefore IM&T training must incorporate data governance and security issues. Clinical systems must be integrated more efficiently to enhance the flow of work, particularly as IM&T crosses different boundaries and there is a greater sharing of patient data.

.

7

Chapter 1: Background and nature of the research

1.1 Introduction

The Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR) commissioned this on-line survey to identify the current Information Management and Technology (IM&T) knowledge and skills of the radiography workforce across the spectrum of Clinical Imaging and Radiotherapy. Informants comprised radiographers, academics, educators and radiography managers, primarily employed in the United Kingdom (UK).

The core team undertaking the work was employed by the Department of Radiography at Cardiff University. This team was supported by a larger steering group comprising clinical staff and other experts in IM&T. Membership of the groups can be found in Appendix 1.

1.2 Background

In the last decade the scope of practice for radiographers has rapidly moved forward (SCoR 2003a). The SCoR (2006) recognised radiographers’ dependency on information management and technology to support practice. PACS and digital acquisition technologies for projection radiography have become commonplace in radiotherapy and diagnostic imaging departments across the UK (SCoR IM&T group 2008). Requardt (2006) suggested that the optimisation of healthcare workflow is dependant on the whole chain of events, from diagnosis to treatment. Optimum health care delivery is therefore focused on a service

using the latest technology and capable of delivering high quality, patient centred care.

The SCoR (2006) noted the impact of national programmes for the radiography workforce in relation to PACS and record and verification systems, combined with modern planning systems and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) services. As a consequence of these national programmes whole system changes in healthcare delivery with rapid links across care have taken place and continue to do so. Radiographers are required to utilise information technology at many levels (Society of Radiographers 2006). Government policies, developments in working practices, professional and regulatory requirements and public expectations are likely to increase radiographers’ involvement.

Radiographers are responsible for guaranteeing the integrity of the data that they input into both clinical and administration systems to ensure the delivery and continuity of high quality healthcare for patients and clients (SCoR 2006). There is therefore a need, in addition to basic IM&T skills, as Devvit and Murphy (2003) commented, of more generic skills in health informatics.

8

The profession of radiography needs to be broad yet flexible in order to satisfy existing and future service needs with provided planned and resourced learning provision (SoR 2003b). Additional support and on-going training will be required if radiographers are to engage with the health informatics agenda and information technology and integrate it fully into daily clinical practice (SCoR 2003b). Furthermore there is a need for radiographers to be trained and educated to an appropriate level to ensure the highest standards of patient care and service delivery (SoR 2003c). Radiographers need to be leaders in developing and maintaining skills and competencies to ensure the technology is appropriately utilised. In addition there is a need for radiographers to be trained and educated to an appropriate level to ensure the highest standards of patient care and service delivery (SoR 2003c).

The SCoR (2006) expects radiographers to engage with, and managers to offer, developmental IM&T opportunities that equip radiographers with the necessary skills. In addition education providers are required to embed IM&T into their curricula and offer appropriate post graduate education.

As a result of the developments there is now a requirement for a comprehensive IM&T skills audit, specific to the radiography profession, in order to establish a baseline of IM&T competency (SCoR 2006). It is anticipated the results of this audit will assist future planning for radiographers IM&T needs. The SCoR (2006) have also set out its expectations for the profession which are:

• All radiographers will grasp developmental opportunities that will equip them with the necessary IM&T skills;

• Managers will offer developmental opportunities that ensure all radiography staff are fit for practice, including IM&T fitness;

• Education providers will embed IM&T within curricular and offer appropriate post qualifying courses to up-skill and maintain competence.

9

1.3 Aims

The aims of this survey were, therefore, to:

1. Identify radiographers engagement in clinical systems e.g. radiotherapy planning systems, RIS, PACS; computed verification systems;

2. Identify radiographers engagement in clinical support systems e.g. audit, governance, research and evidence based practice, electronic requests, prescribing, coding, e-booking;

3. Identify radiographers’ engagement in general IM&T systems e.g. word processing, email and internet usage.

4. Determine future IM&T needs and developments;

5. Identify training needs and standards to be implemented at all levels of the workforce.

1.4 Method

The nature and aims of the study suggested a questionnaire was the most appropriate method of gaining the required information. After consideration of the constraints on resources (time, finance, researchers) and the informants to be targeted it was concluded that an on line questionnaire would keep distribution costs to a minimum while maximising engagement with the radiographic workforce. Additionally the use of the Bristol On-Line Survey (BOS) as an electronic method of data collection facilitated the consideration and analysis of results. A postal questionnaire was made available on request.

In order to avoid any confusion or ambiguity a definition of IM&T was required. After considerable consultation with members of the profession this was agreed as the processes and technology required to capture, store, distribute and analyse patient and service data.

Whilst being mindful of the aims of the study the questionnaire was designed with reference to the literature and current government initiatives in consultation with the project steering group, members of the SCoR IM&T group and clinical and academic colleagues. The diverse nature of radiographers’ involvement in IM&T in and outside the workplace and their engagement with education and training emerged and was embedded into the content of

10

the questionnaire. The questionnaire was divided into seven sections namely: demographic details, IM&T Ability, work based IM&T usage, personal IM&T usage, security & governance issues, education & training experience, and the future.

A pilot questionnaire was considered by approximately 30 informants comprising steering group members, academic and clinical colleagues and members of the IM&T group. Feedback was obtained from 14 of those considering the pilot and subsequent amendments made. A hard copy of the final questionnaire is available in Appendix 2. It was felt that in order for the outcomes to be representative of the radiographic workforce in question widespread engagement was vital. The questionnaire was promoted via articles in Synergy News and on the SCoR web site. The SCoR contacted members individually via e mail and those who were members of SCoR groups, network and regional committees. Flyers were widely distributed and participation encouraged by the opportunity for informants to enter a prize draw to win a digital camera and web cams.

11

Chapter 2: Results

2.1 Informants

Approximately 19,250 qualified radiographers were members of the Society of Radiographers during 2007-2008. 1443 valid responses to this survey were received within the time limit. This represents approximately 7.5% of the total (SoR) membership. Of these 1232 (85.4%) described their discipline as diagnostic and 211 (14.6%) as therapeutic.

As indicated by responses to Questions 1-3 the majority of informants, as anticipated, were members of the Society of Radiographers (98%) and female (78.9%). Informants represented the full range of age categories presented in the questionnaire (20 years - 60+ years) with most (67.4%) being aged over 40 years. 97.7% of informants were located in the UK with the largest number (14.2%) located in the south east of England and working in the NHS (83%). 92 (6.4%) worked in independent / private sectors.

Most informants were in bands 7 (32.6%) and 6 (31.9%) with 343 (23.8%) of informants employed in general radiography, 152 (10.5%) in ultrasound and 129 (8.9%) in management. 88 (6.1%) were employed in higher education, 85 (5.9%) in accident and emergency / trauma radiography, 82 in breast imaging and 74 (5.1%) in radiotherapy treatment. Other informants worked in a wide range of diagnostic and therapeutic areas such as MRI, CT, radioisotopes/ nuclear medicine, radiotherapy pre-treatment and IM&T.

The main specialties of the consultant radiographer informants were breast (3) reporting (3), ultrasound (3) with 2 informants describing themselves as working in advanced practice. The remaining 11 consultants who participated worked in 11 differing specialties namely ‘Brachytherapy, Abdominal and gynae, DXA bone densitometry , Emergency Care, GI /Urology , Head and Neck Oncology, Imaging Specialist , Macmillan, Mammography, Palliative Radiotherapy, Vascular and general Abdominal’.

103 (7.1%) of informants worked in a university with the majority (39%) employed as lecturers and 30.5% engaged as senior lecturers in a post-92 university (i.e. an institution created after 1992). Since university employed staff formed a small percentage of the total informants and the aims of the study focused on IM&T in the clinical setting this group will not be considered separately. However the findings may be considered in a separate report.

The highest level of qualification informants commonly held was a bachelor’s degree (24.8%), with others identifying their highest qualification as diploma (20.9%), postgraduate

12

diploma (18.6%), postgraduate certificate (15.1%), master’s degree (15%) and doctorate (1.1%).

Only 184 (12.8%) were primarily employed or required, to undertake a specific IM&T role in their job/specification.

2.2 Information Management and Technology: Ability

Informants rated their level of ability on a scale of 1 – 6 where 1 described a Beginner and 6 described an Expert. The majority (1005 / 70%) rated their ability as 4 and above (Table 1). When cross tabulated with age, it was evident that 73% under 40 yrs rated their ability as 4 and over, compared to 69% in the 40-59 yr age group. When the 60+yrs age group results were added to the 40-59 yr age group, the figure dropped slightly to 68%.

Level of IM&T ability Beginner 2 3 4 5 Expert TotalAge 20-29 6 9 31 82 40 3 171

30-39 7 12 61 127 81 9 29740-49 11 28 120 195 126 19 49950-59 7 25 95 201 77 12 41760+ 0 4 15 19 12 2 52Total 31 78 322 624 336 45 1436

Table 1: Level of IM&T ability and age

When considering IM&T ability and Agenda for Change (AfC) band, 80% at band 8 and above rated their ability at over 4 compared to 66% at bands 5 and 6, and 67% at band 7. Those in the higher bandings (8a and over) considered themselves to have greater aptitude than those in bands 5 to 7 (Table 2).

Level of IM&T ability Beginner 2 3 4 5 Expert TotalBand 5 6 14 40 69 42 3 174Band 6 3 25 104 163 81 10 386Band 7 12 20 92 172 90 9 395Band 8a a n d higher

3 8 34 110 57 13 225

Other 0 1 3 10 7 1 22Total 24 68 273 524 277 36 1202

Table 2: Level of IM&T ability and band

13

2.3 Information Management and Technology: Confidence

When asked about their level of confidence in using IM&T, the majority of informants felt they were fairly confident, with only 1.5% indicating they were not confident at all and 9.5% indicating they were very confident. There was no difference in confidence levels in the use of IM&T in general between those employed in the NHS and the private sector.

Confidence in using IM&T N o t

confident 2 3 4 5V e r y confident Total

Age 20-29 4 10 27 55 59 14 16930-39 6 19 48 103 84 36 29640-49 7 29 101 167 146 49 49950-59 5 28 98 150 103 33 41760+ 0 3 15 17 13 4 52Total 22 89 289 492 405 136 1433

Table 3: Confidence in using IM&T vs. age

Age Group % demonstrating confidence20-29 7630-39 7940-49 7250-59 6860+ 65

Table 4: Percentage of Age Groups demonstrating Confidence in using IM&T

Typically across the age groups most informants indicated they were generally confident in IM&T. When looking at specific age groups versus confidence in using IM&T a higher percentage of those in the 30-39 age group demonstrated confidence. Similarly when compared to other age groups a higher proportion of those the 30-39 age group indicated they were very confident in their use of IM&T.

Confidence in using IM&T N o t

confident 2 3 4 5V e r y confident Total

B a n d Recode

Band 5 3 16 35 54 53 11 172Band 6 2 26 84 136 106 31 385Band 7 8 29 79 144 92 43 395Band 8a a n d higher

3 9 34 78 72 29 225

Other 0 0 5 6 7 4 22Total 16 80 237 418 330 118 1199

Table 5: Confidence in using IM&T vs. band

14

When considering band versus confidence, informants at bands 6 and above tended to rate themselves as fairly confident to very confident (Table 5).Training, confidence and time were considered to be the main issues as one informant highlighted:

‘Lack of time and priority given to adequate training at different levels i.e. the least competent need to be given more training. Government targets mean that staff are kept in the department rather than being given time for training.’

There was also a number of comments concerning age related fears and confidence for example.

‘Older members of staff lack confidence and have missed out on the essential building blocks of knowledge needed to build a strong foundation on which to build further skills.’

‘Older radiographers are reluctant to learn new skills.’

‘Older staff don’t like change.’

While these comments provide a further insight into radiographers perceptions they were not substantiated by the data provided by informants.

2.4 Information Management & Technology: Work Applications

2.4.1 Importance

The majority of informants believed that IM&T applications in the work place were very important (37%) and 33% felt they were important. Only 0.4% considered IM&T not to be important. There were no particular differences relating to age and band.

15

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Wor Excel Datab Emai Intern Intran Power CPD

Appli

Coun RarelyOccasWeekly

Graph 1: Applications used as part of work

E mail had the most widespread use in work being used by 1409 (98.1%) informants. Of these 78.3% used this application on a daily basis (Graph1). Internet usage received a similar response with a reported use by 1403 (98%) of informants. Of these 67.6% (967) used the internet on a daily basis. The intranet was used by 1386 (97.6%) of informants and on a daily basis by 875 (61.6%). Work use of word processing (e.g. Word) received a similar response being used by 1290 (97%) of informants. Of these 591 (41.2%) used this application daily. 63% of informants regularly used IM&T for CPD purposes. Other applications were used less widely. When considering work usage of applications by the various groups, bands 8a and above showed greatest involvement in all major applications used such as word processing, Excel, databases, e mail and internet.

The use of presentation applications was minimal but bands 8A and above showed greater involvement than other bands. There was little difference in usage across the age groups. Internet work usage on a weekly basis by the 20-29 age group was 5% less than the lowest figure for the other age groups.

.2 E mail

For e mail all age groups tended to use e mail for work purposes weekly or more. In each of the age groups over 90% of the informants used e mail weekly or more (Graph2).

16

Graph 2: E mail usage related to age

When looking at e mail usage versus band (Graph3) it appears that all groups tend to engage in e mail communication weekly or more. The use of e mail as a means of communication increases in relation to the increase in the banding levels. 90% of all informants in each band used e mail weekly or more often.

Graph 3: E mail usage related to bands

17

.3 Internet

Findings relating to age and use of the internet (Graph 4) are similar to those for engagement with e mail, over 90% of informants in each of the bands using the internet weekly or more. The 40-49 age group demonstrated highest usage on a weekly basis. When considering weekly and occasional use, the 30-39 age group showed the greatest engagement. Use of the internet across the bands was similar to e mail usage, the higher the band the greater the number of informants who used the internet (Graph 5).

Graph 4: Internet usage related to age

Graph 5: Internet usage related to bands

18

2.4.4 Word

When looking at age and usage for word processing the majority of users tend to be the 40-49 (377) age group closely followed by the 50-59 (326) age group. There is limited usage (40) in the 60 and above group (Graph 6).

Graph 6: Word usage related to age

Those in bands 7 (296) and 8a (220) indicated greater use of word processing than those in other bands. 67 informants in band 5 and 67 at band 6 reported they rarely / never used word processing in work (Graph 7).

Graph 7: Word usage related to bands

19

Informants were also asked how confident they felt using a range of generalised / educational IM&T applications. (Graph 8) The findings show that there is high confidence for applications where there was high usage (e.g. weekly or more) namely e mail, internet, intranet and word processing. There was a wider distribution of confidence levels for applications such as PowerPoint and databases which were not used as frequently.

Graph 8: Confidence in using General IM&T Applications

2.5 Information Management & Technology: Home Applications

2.5.1 Engagement

Informants were asked about their engagement in IM&T in the home as well as the work place. The rationale for this was to consider their overall IM&T engagement, taking into consideration that many informants may use IM&T relating to work at home. It was also thought that informants may consider themselves to be inept in IM&T in the workplace but demonstrate confidence in its use at home.Informants were also asked about their own personal IM&T use. In particular which IM&T applications they have at home and which are for work or personal usage.

20

Graph 9: Home based IM&T Applications

From the above it appears that informants have a good range of IM&T applications at home and that they tend to use them for both personal use and work related activities. Of particular note are the dual use of word processing, email and the internet. It appears that databases, spreadsheets, and presentation applications are used for work place activities more than the other applications. When asked about the importance of IM&T in the home the majority (30.1%) felt IM&T was fairly important and 24.4% considered IM&T to be important.

2.5.2 Access to the Internet

The majority of informants (88.5%) had access to broadband in the home as indicated in Table 6 below.

Type of access to the Internet % of Informants Dial-up 3.1%Broadband cable 31%Broadband (fixed land line) 57.5%USB modem 6.6%Other 1.8%

Table 6: Internet Access at home

21

2.6 Clinical Applications

2.6.1 Engagement

Informants were asked which clinical systems they used and how often.

Graph 10: Usage of IM&T Applications

For daily use, the most popular applications were RIS (66.4%), PACS (65.2%), HIS (36.6%), electronic patient records (33.6%) and electronic booking systems (30.2%).

When considering the therapy clinical systems and accounting for the number of therapy informants (n=211), 25% were engaging daily in radiotherapy treatment planning systems, 43% engaging daily in radiotherapy treatment verification systems and 56% engaging daily in radiotherapy patient management record systems. Clinical systems, used less frequently, included virtual training systems (once a month 7%), remote reporting (daily 9.6%), on line test results (daily 16.9%) and e –prescribing (rarely 2%).

As indicated in Graph 10, PACS, RIS, and HIS, were the most frequently used clinical applications. Engagement with these applications has been considered separately for diagnostic and therapeutic informants.

22

Graph 11: Percentage of Diagnostic Radiography Informants engagement with PACS, RIS & HIS

Results indicated that of the three main diagnostic clinical applications HIS was used less frequently. RIS was the application used most frequently by diagnostic informants on a daily basis (75.6%) followed by PACS (72.6%) with HIS only used by 37.9%.In comparison 59.5% of therapeutic informants were engaged with HIS, 56.9% of those engaged with PACS and 27.9% engaged with RIS (23.2% on a daily basis).

Graph 12: Percentage of Therapeutic Informants’ engagement with PACS, RIS & HIS

23

It is suggested the differences noted between diagnostic and therapeutic radiographers engagement with these three systems is indicative of the nature of the daily tasks each group undertakes.

When considering therapeutic informants engagement with radiotherapy specific applications it can be seen that most engagement takes place with radiotherapy patient management and least engagement with radiotherapy treatment planning. Use of radiotherapy treatment verification lies between the two (Graph 13).

Graph 13: Percentage of Therapeutic Informants’ engagement with main Radiotherapy Specific Applications

2.6.2 Confidence

Informants were asked how confident they felt using specialised radiographic / clinical IM&T applications (Graph 14). For the systems that were used daily, informants felt very confident with PACS (33.1%), RIS (38.8%) and HIS (19.7%). For applications that were not being used frequently the responses were much more widely spread, for electronic booking systems 15.9% were confident, 12.6% fairly confident and 5% not confident. The findings were similar for electronic remote reporting, on line test results and e-prescribing. For the therapy applications (n= 211) 15% were confident in using radiotherapy treatment planning systems, 10% were not very confident, however the majority (68%) were fairly confident. For radiotherapy treatment verification systems 42% were very confident, with only 11% feeling not very confident. For radiotherapy patient management record systems again the majority (45%) were very confident. These results indicate that if the application is used frequently informants tend to feel more confident in using them.

24

Graph 14: Confidence using IM&T applications

As indicated in Graph 15 diagnostic informants indicated most confidence when using PACS, HIS and RIS applications with greatest confidence demonstrated in RIS.

Graph 15: Diagnostic Informants Confidence in using PACS, RIS & HISWhen considering therapeutic informants’ confidence in the same applications (PACS, RIS and HIS), the proportion who indicated they were very confident was not as great as their

25

diagnostic counterparts (Graph 16). However therapeutic informants showed greater confidence in the use of radiotherapy specific clinical applications as indicated in Graph 17.

Graph 16: Therapeutic Informants Confidence in using PACS, RIS & HIS

Graph 17: Therapeutic Informants Confidence in using Radiotherapy Specific ApplicationsWhen considering age versus confidence, Graph 18 shows that few informants in the 60+ age group feel very confident using radiography specific systems i.e. PACS, RIS and HIS.

26

Closer analysis of the percentage of informants per age group indicating a score of 5 or more i.e. high level of confidence, reveals that there are minimal differences between the age groups in relation to confidence of using these systems, as can be seen in Graph 19.

Graph 18: Confidence using PACS, RIS and HIS vs Age

Graph 19: Percentage of age group indicating a score of 5 or 6 (very confident) using PACS, RIS and HISWhen looking at band versus confidence in using radiography specific systems i.e. PACS, RIS and HIS, the majority rate themselves as being confident to very confident (Graph 20).

27

In fact there was little difference between the scores of 5 or more for confidence in using these systems (Graph 21).

Graph 20: Confidence using PACS, RIS and HIS vs Band

Graph 21: Percentage of bands scoring 5 or 6 (very confident) in using PACS RIS and HISFor the responses relating to radiotherapy specific applications, Graph 22 shows that there is a high confidence level for each age group, although the numbers corresponding to the 60+ age group was low. Closer analysis of the scores of 5 or more (very confident) shows

28

that there is a slight decline in the percentage indicating a high level of confidence as age increases (Graph 23).

Graph 22: Confidence levels of using radiotherapy applications versus age

Graph 23: Percentage of age group indicating a score of 5 or 6 (very confident) in using radiotherapy applications

Analysis of the effect of band on confidence levels of using radiotherapy applications can be seen in Graph 24. Again the results show a large proportion of each band being

29

confident in using these applications. Graph 25 shows that there is minimal difference between the bands for scores of 5 or more in relation to confidence in using these systems.

Graph 24: Confidence levels of using radiotherapy applications versus band

Graph 25: Percentage of band indicating a score of 5 or 6 (very confident) in using radiotherapy applications

30

Graph 26: Diagnostic Informants use of PACS vs Confidence

As demonstrated in Graph 26 diagnostic radiographers’ confidence in using PACS increased as their usage increased. However as indicated in Graph 27 therapeutic informants’ confidence using PACS does not increase at a similar rate to their diagnostic counterparts but reported greater confidence in the applications used most frequently.

Graph 27: Therapeutic Informants Use of PACS: Use vs. Confidence

31

Graph 28: Informants Confidence vs. Use of on line test results application

When considering on line test results those demonstrating least confidence rarely used this application (Graph 28). Confidence increases as engagement with an application (use) increases.

2.6.3 NHS versus Independent Private Sector

On the whole when investigating confidence levels in using the major specialist radiographic applications (PACS/HIS/RIS and main radiotherapy applications) dependent upon place of employment, there is little difference between those informants who work in the NHS and those in the Independent/Private sector. However as can be seen in Graphs 29 and 30, the confidence of informants in using PACS and RIS is much higher for those working in the NHS than in the Independent/Private sector, where nearly twice as many NHS radiographers feel very confident in using these applications.

32

Graph 29: NHS vs. Independent / Private Sectors Comparison of Confidence in using PACS

Graph 30: NHS vs. Independent / Private Sectors Comparison of Confidence in using RIS NHS

33

2.7 Data Transmission and Storage

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Internall Internall External Externally

Authority to

CounNNeve

OccasAlway

Graph 31: Authority to send/transmit data

1078 (75%) of informants always (that is in all instances) had the authority to send / transmit data internally within the department with only 3.7% (53) never having this authority (Graph 31).

Authority to transmit was reduced when recipients were external to the department and as restrictions diminished. 65.6% (947) always had the authority to transmit data internally within the trust or equivalent with 5.7% (82) never having this authority. Transmission of data externally with some restrictions was always possible for only 34% of informants and never for 15.5%. External transmission without restrictions was always possible for only 260 (18.8%) and never for 37.8% (545).

When considering the Data Protection Act 83.6% of informants were aware of their responsibilities, 14.3% were unsure and 2.0% were unaware. When these results are examined for diagnostic and therapeutic radiography informants (Graph 32) there is little difference between the two groups.

34

Graph 32: Awareness of Responsibilities under the Data Protection Act

The use of Smartcards was not widespread with only 9.1% indicating they used this technology, 75.1% indicating no involvement and for 15.9% the question was not applicable.

2.8 Barriers to the use of Information Management and Technology

Training was the main issue identified as a barrier to the use of IM&T. Others are indicated in Table 7 below.

Barriers Informants Training 183Confidence/ Technophobia 85Time constraints 70Adequacy of equipment 54Access 51Cost / Finance 46Age 45Lack of support 12Advancements in technology/practice 8Confidentiality 5Security 4Complexity 5Data protection 4Elitism 2

35

Management 1Pay 1

Table 7: Barriers to the use of IM&T

.9 Education and Training

2.9.1 Qualifications

IM&T Qualifications held Number of Responses None 742Certificate of Attendance 338ECDL 222Internal work based certificates of attainment 196CLAiT 112Other 109GCSE or equivalent 78NVQ 20

Table 8: IM&T Qualifications

The majority of informants (742) had no qualifications in IM&T. Since a certificate of attendance is not recognised as an award ECDL was the qualification held by the most informants. The 32 other qualifications cited by 93 informants covered a wide spectrum including advanced ECDL (n=2), part ECDL (n=12), City and Guilds (n=9), A level (n=6), Advanced courses in PACS and RIS (6), HND/HNC (6), RSA (6) and BTEC (3). The ECDL is an internationally recognised qualification which enables individuals to demonstrate their competence in computer skills. It is designed specifically for those wishing to gain a benchmark qualification in computing to enable them to develop their IT skills and enhance their career prospects (British Computer Society 2008). The ECDL syllabus covers the key concepts of computing, its practical applications and their use in the workplace and society. It comprises seven modules, each of which must be passed before an ECDL certificate is awarded.

The seven modules that make up the ECDL are:1. Basic concepts of IT 2. Using the computer and managing files 3. Word processing 4. Spreadsheets 5. Database

36

6. Presentation

7. Information and Communication

The modules may be taken in any order and over any period of time up to three years which makes this a flexible option for those in clinical practice where access to a computer during the normal working day may be problematic. This flexibility and the relatively low cost to the department or learner (approximately £150) may contribute to the popularity of this qualification amongst informants.

.2 General Information Management & Technology Training

In relation to the type of general IM&T training undertaken, the informants indicated a variety of methods (Graph 33) and it was evident that a combination of training methods had been experienced for the various applications. The majority of responses however indicated a lack of formal training, with the number of informants having experienced external training being very small. Indeed, this represented 13% of all responses received for this question. Similarly, informants had a low experience of informal training, with only 16% of responses indicating that they had received any kind of internal training. Of the formal training which had taken place most of this was at an introductory level (3370 responses) compared to advanced type of training (1030 responses). Ad hoc training accounted for 14% of the responses, whilst the majority of responses (57%) indicated that the informants were self-taught or had no experience of training.

Graph 33: Type of general IM&T training undertaken

37

For most informants the training had taken place in a group for all applications. For training in word and spreadsheets the second highest form of training was distance/remote learning, the third one to one and the fourth specialist (e.g. vendor) training. For all other applications one to one was the second highest form, with remote learning taking third place and specialist (vendor) training taking fourth.

Graph 34: Training Format General Applications

When considering preferences (Graph 35), training received in a group was identified as the preferred format for all applications except for statistics where one to one was marginally preferred (41%) to group training (38%). The second most preferred method for all other applications was one to one except for e mail and internet training where self taught came second to group training. Specialist (vendor) training was the least preferred method of training for all applications.

38

Graph 35: Preferred format General IM&T Applications

2.9.3 Clinical Applications Training

Graph 36: Clinical Applications IM&T training undertaken (Diagnostic & Therapeutic Informants)

Participation in advanced training courses was minimal for all clinical applications. Internal introductory level courses were those most used for PACS (n=552), RIS (n=551), HIS

39

(n=434), electronic patient records (n=284), electronic booking systems (n=283) and online test results (n=172). Informal / ad hoc training was the next most frequent undertaken for PACS (n=439), RIS (n=385), HIS (n=375), electronic booking systems (n=350), electronic patient records (n=308) and online test results (n=266). None / self taught was the response for on line test results (n=230), virtual training systems (n=197), HIS (n=194), electronic patient record records (n=174), electronic booking systems (n=166), PACS (n=138) and RIS (n=134). Not applicable was the highest response for all other applications. Very few (11%) had undertaken advanced radiography specific IM&T systems training. This type of training was seen to be mostly self taught or ad hoc (52% of responses) and introductory level training (37% of responses), represented in Graph 36. The format of the training reported was mainly in one to one or group format (89% of responses), which again is the preferred format (84% of responses) for most of the informants (Graph 39).

As anticipated diagnostic radiographers training in radiotherapy specific applications was minimal. As indicated in Graph 37 for diagnostic informants PACS and RIS were the applications where most training had taken place and where internal training was prevalent. For other applications ad hoc training dominated.

Graph 37: Clinical Applications Training (Diagnostic Informants)

A contrast between diagnostic and therapeutic informants can be seen in Graphs 37 and 38. Training in radiotherapy verification, management, electronic booking and treatment planning had been undertaken by more therapeutic informants than training in other clinical

40

applications. For these applications internal training was prevalent and self taught training minimal, although more self taught training took place in other applications.

Graph 38: Clinical Applications Training (Therapeutic Informants)

Graph 39: Preferred Format of Clinical Applications Training (Diagnostic and Therapeutic Informants)

In Graph 39 informants preferred a group format of training for most applications. For those who had undergone training in clinical applications, group training was preferred by 48% for

41

HIS, 45% for RIS and 42% for PACS. One to one was the preferred method for radiotherapy treatment planning (47%), radiotherapy verification (44%) and remote reporting (43%). A similar pattern emerges for diagnostic and therapeutic preferences independently.

Graph 40: Preferred Format of Clinical Applications Training (Diagnostic Informants)

For the application used most frequently by diagnostic informants (RIS) group training was the preferred method (45.4%). When considering PACS there was little preference demonstrated by diagnostic informants between one to one (42.8%) and group training (42.9%). For HIS and RIS, results were similar where the preferred format of training was in a group. Group training was the preferred method by diagnostic informants for all other applications except for remote reporting where one to one was preferred.

42

Graph 41: Preferred Format of Therapy Clinical Applications Training (Therapeutic Informants)

When considering therapeutic informants, Graph 41 demonstrates one to one training was the preferred method for radiotherapy treatment planning (49.3%) and radiotherapy verification (46.9%). Group training was the preferred method for all other therapeutic applications.

Graph 42 below provides a comparison between the preferred format of training for diagnostic and therapeutic informants. Of note is that for the main diagnostic applications, group training was preferred whilst for the main radiotherapy applications one to one was the preferred method.

43

Graph 42: Diagnostic & Therapeutic Informants Preferred Format of Training

2.9.4 Barriers to Information Management & Technology Training

Barrier to IM&T Training Number of ResponsesTime 339Funding/Costs 169Staffing 86Training Quality 44Skills/Training 39Attitudes 38Access/Availability 35Resources 27Fear/Age 21IM&T Resources/Issues 17Not part of Job 2Patient Care/Service Delivery 3

Table 9: Barriers to IM&T Training

The main barrier identified was that of time. This related to time to be released from the department in terms of clinical load and the availability of staff to cover absences. Informants felt that ad-hoc training in the work place was not sufficient and that staff

44

needed to be released to undergo formal training. They recognised that this could not happen without adequate funding, which needed to be invested in quality training courses and also to release staff from their ordinary work.

‘There is never enough time to learn anything in the NHS. We are too busy dealing with our own work load.’

‘Staff shortages often result in people not be able to go on training courses.’

Radiographers also commented that IM&T training was not valued by many departments as one informant commented:

‘A computer is still viewed by the people who lead as a play thing for geeks. As such it I not considered a worthy cause to spend the training budget on.’

Others felt that formal training was not always necessary and that it was possible to learn from others in the work place but that you needed time to reflect and practice the skills for the learning to be meaningful.

‘The presumption is that training is always necessary. If staff had the time facilities and resources and encouragement (protected study time) then ICT skills would increase substantially.’

2.10 IM&T: The Future

When considering the future, only 228 informants were able to identify future aspect of IM&T which they thought might be useful or would like to see in practice. Responses were varied with no consensus demonstrated. 24 suggested they would like to see an increase in functionality of RIS/PACS.11 identified training in virtual systems while a further eleven identified the need for better integration of these systems:

‘The joining together of the many systems currently in use. To be able to do what I currently do, I need at least 10 passwords.’

Radiographers were asked to comment on which IM&T skills they considered to be necessary for the future. While not all responses can be classified as skills they do provide an insight into the areas where training needs to be focused although the low response rate

45

for this question provides an indication of the difficulty in predicting the future in imaging and radiotherapy.

A general knowledge of word processing and data management was the skill which predominantly featured being identified by 138 of the 531 informants. Other skills which informants identified are included in the table below.

Future Skills Numbers respondingGeneral knowledge of word processing, graphs, data management,

138

ECDL 63PACS/RIS/HIS/Networking 55All 44Keyboard Skills 23Databases 22Excel 17Better understanding of how things work 13Computer literate 13E mail 12Internet /intranet 11Advanced skills in computing 11

Table 10: Future Skills (n=531)

A range of other skills (43) were identified including ‘as many as possible’ and ‘lots’ with a comment made by one informant:

‘Becoming essential to the role in increasing computerized image acquisition retrieval / data management systems role development by E KSF.’

‘To be computer literate, the basics of which are presumably covered by the national curriculum.’

An interesting finding was that 63 informants suggested that the ECDL or higher might need to be a requirement for the job in the future.

Connecting for Health, in England, has developed the Essential IT Skills (EITS) Programme following a national consultation with NHS stakeholders to supersede the ECDL Service. This programme has been designed to provide local NHS organisations with eLearning tools to ensure NHS staff are prepared for NPfIT systems training rollouts.

46

The programme will initially focus on the delivery of two qualifications. NHS ELITE (NHS eLearning IT Essentials) an eLearning package for improving candidate’s essential IT skills and NHS Health (NHS eLearning for Health Information Systems), designed to improve individual’s knowledge of the basic principles relating to information governance and patient safety when using health information systems.

The need for organised training was highlighted by several informants whose comments included:

‘Unfair and unrealistic to expect radiographers to pick up IM&T skills by self teaching and picking up hints and tips from other staff members.’

‘We have so many computer illiterate staff that it is detrimental to the efficient service that we strive to provide.’

Radiographers also commented that they would need ongoing training and education as technology moved on very quickly:

‘Image acquisition, processing communication with wards and outside referrers will all eventually go to electronic all round skill is therefore required and are also essential for CPD.’

‘ As technology grows very fast it is important to keep ourselves up to date in skills and technology which will help radiographers and other related medical professionals to share, transfer information (data /images in a fast and easy way.’

Other areas that were mentioned were ‘higher level skills’, for example knowing how things work so that they could trouble shoot computer problems when they occurred.

‘It should feature as a regular item on a departments CPD program (i.e. small building block approach ) For example background information on how computers networks function specific tailored small group activities on essential work elements (e.g. RIS PACS operational general elements (e.g. word Excel) which are available to NHS staff).’

‘Nice to have some knowledge of what to do when the systems we use daily do not work, it would empower radiographers….’

When asked to identify any future aspects of IM&T which may be useful to radiographers or that they would like to see in practice, 62 of the 221 responses related to training. Several

47

indicated a need for increased access to training in IM&T at varying levels as the following quotes illustrate:

‘(Need) At least basic computer literacy training. I started radiography in the days when you still dipped your films into fixer and developers.’

‘I think it would be a good idea if the HPC could play a role in assessing radiographers IT skills so as to ensure they have a pre-determined competence in order to practice.’

‘More thorough organised training, where individuals reach a known and quantifiable level of skill rather than ad hoc training.’

‘Perhaps SCoR could produce on-line training sessions.’

However there were also some conflicting views:

‘It’s just record keeping and communication; it doesn’t need complicating beyond that.’

‘We don’t need formal training for every single bit of software. If radiographers can take the initiative and do a Google search to find out how to use some package rather than say ‘we need training’. Confidence building is needed.’

The hypothetical nature of this question resulted in a varied response with radiographers perhaps talking more personally about how they see the future need for IT training / skills affecting them rather than the profession. However several conclusions may be drawn.

Radiographers do perceive that the range and level of IM&T in the workplace will increase and they will need training to cope with this, particularly in the general IT area and with specialist clinical systems. They feel a need for progression in training from understanding the basics at entry level to having greater higher order skills as they move through their career. There is also a feeling that training should be more structured and that there should be greater recognition for the training undertaken.

48

Chapter 3: Conclusions

This research, commissioned by the Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR) has provided a wealth of data on the Information Management and Technology (IM&T) knowledge, skills, engagement and education of radiographers, managers and educators in Clinical Imaging and Radiotherapy. A response rate of 1443 was achieved. Although not fully representative of the 19,250, (approximate) members of the SCoR, compared to other on-line surveys commissioned this is a high response rate. This response rate was achieved through widespread publicity and a prize draw. The option to complete a paper based questionnaire was also given, although this was only taken up by 2 informants. It has to be recognised that one of the limitations of this research could be that the opinions from people having real difficulties with IM&T may have been missed because of the nature of the data collection process. In addition while some conclusions can be drawn from informants self assessment of their ability and confidence it must be recognised that individuals may be operating within the confines of their own level of ability and unaware of the knowledge and skills that they could achieve in specific applications.

However it is evident that IM&T is a topic which the radiographic workforce consider crucial since 90% rated IM&T in the workplace as important / very important. The high response rate to this survey may be due to the emotive nature of the topic and the difficulties informants are experiencing with the ongoing developments in IM&T.

Informants recognised the importance of IM&T in the workplace with no particular differences relating to age and band. There was engagement with IM&T across the board in a wide variety of applications. The majority (70%) of informants rated their general ability and confidence as fairly high. Those respondents in the higher bands considered themselves to have a higher aptitude for IM&T, the vast majority of those at band 8 and above rated their ability at over 4, significantly higher than those in other bands. Although there were no major differences with age, those under 40 years of age rated their ability higher than those over 40 years. Several informants commented that those in the ‘older’ age group had difficulties with IM&T while those in the younger age groups were more at ease and found applications easier.

Typically across the age groups most radiographers indicated they were generally confident in IM&T. When looking at specific age groups versus confidence in using IM&T a higher percentage of those in the 30-39 age group rated themselves as confident. Similarly when compared to other age groups a higher proportion of those the 30-39 age group indicated they were very confident. When considering confidence, this also appeared to be dependent on Agenda for Change bandings with those at bands 8 or above showing greater confidence than those in the lower bandings. It is suggested that this confidence

49

has developed from the level and degree of engagement, since those in higher bandings demonstrated greater usage than those in the lower bandings. Additionally it is suggested that those in higher bandings will be required to manage and solve problems associated with IM&T and may have responsibilities to train others and are likely to have management responsibilities requiring greater engagement in audit and databases. Informants employed in the NHS showed greater confidence in clinical applications than those employed in independent/private sectors.

Typically E mail, internet, intranet and word processing were the most commonly used applications in the workplace. Others such as Excel, databases, PowerPoint were used less frequently. When considering engagement in clinical applications, for daily use the most applications were RIS, PACS and HIS. For therapeutic radiography informants the greatest engagement was with HIS followed by PACS and HIS. For radiotherapy applications, patient management record systems followed by radiotherapy treatment verification systems were used most widely used. The clinical systems that were used least frequently were virtual training systems and e-prescribing, which are relatively new applications and not yet utilised in every department. When informants were asked about their confidence in using these clinical applications, they reported high confidence for applications that were used daily (e.g. PACS, HIS, RIS, patient management record systems). Conversely where applications were only rarely used, confidence was much lower, for example using on line test results applications.

Transmission of data within departments and trusts was widespread. As expected the restrictions of data protection meant that few had authorisation to transmit data further a field. It was surprising that few were engaged in the use of SMART cards despite the fact that over 400,000 have been issued to NHS staff and students in England.

The number of informants using IM&T for CPD purposes on a regular basis was less than expected (63%). It is outside the remit of this study to determine whether this reflects engagement with CPD, IM&T or both. This was an unexpected result since the majority of informants were members of the Society of Radiographers and therefore had access to ‘CPD Now’. Lack of confidence is unlikely to be the reason since over half 55% of informants expressed confidence in the use of IM&T for CPD.

Training was identified as the main barrier to the use of IM&T. One of the main themes that emerged from this study was the lack of structured training accessible to informants. Indications were that this mainly related to staff being released from departments, and individuals own clinical workloads and financing. Despite this 334 informants did have a formal nationally recognised qualification such as the ECDL and CLAiT. The majority of

50

informants had not received any formal training in general IM&T applications and were primarily self-taught. When general IM&T training did take place this was primarily at an introductory level and took place in a group which matched with the preferred format for this type of application. The other significant point to note is that when training did take place for clinical applications it was mainly informal / ad hoc, except for HIS and RIS where informants had participated in small group training or one to one training. It appears from the findings that this kind of ad hoc training is appropriate for applications that are used on a daily basis as long as ongoing support and advice are available. However for applications that are not used frequently it appears ad hoc training was not sufficient. Some informants did express a need for more high level training so that they could understand the systems more fully and would be able to troubleshoot problems arising. The preferred method of training for most applications was one to one or group training. Specialist training was only requested by a small number of informants. In addition remote learning was not rated as a popular method to learn.

The main barrier to training in IM&T was identified as time.

51

Chapter 4: Recommendations

IM&T is an evolving discipline in radiography, the scope of practice ranges from general IM&T skills to in-depth knowledge of specialist clinical applications. Therefore the workforce needs to be adaptable to change and IM&T skills need to be acquired and updated. In order to enhance the skills of the workforce and improve patient care there needs to be more IM&T training.

1. IM&T skills for new graduates need to be identified, and these skills should be explicit within undergraduate curricula, at least to ECDL level.

2. Educational placements offering IM&T experiences need to be identified for higher education students, with in-service education required for HIS, RIS and PACs.

3. Further research is required to evaluate the efficacy of different types of training.

4. More work and investment is needed to support a clinical and cultural change, it is acknowledged radiographers require basic IM&T skills (at least the ECDL) but need to be encouraged to achieve at least a basic level of competence.

5. The benefits to an organisation of staff training, education and qualifications in IM&T should be acknowledged and addressed with adequate resources to ensure radiographers are equipped with the necessary IM&T skills to ensure optimum service delivery and patient care.

6. Further work is required to map IM&T competencies across bands and specialties and where necessary, accredited courses developed.

7. Key staff must understand how IM&T can benefit patient care in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and safety, and how to apply knowledge and skills within their area of expertise.

8. In the future advanced IM&T skills may need to be recognised as an area of role development / advanced practice.

9. Clinical systems must be integrated more efficiently to enhance the flow of work, particularly as IM&T crosses different boundaries and there is a greater sharing of patient data.

10. Extra training should be given to issues surrounding data protection.

52

References

British Computer Society (2008) www.bcs.org accessed November 28th 2008

College of Radiographers (2003b) Role Development Revisited: the Research Evidence 2003 London. Society and College of Radiographers.

Devvit, N. and Murphy, J. (2003) The IM&T training needs of doctors in an acute UK NHS trust. In: Teach Globally, Learn Locally: Innovations in Health and Biomedical Informatics Education in the 21st Century; IMIA Working Group on Education, 2003, Portland, Oregon, USA.

Society and College of Radiographers (2003a) The Scope of Practice 2003.London. Society and College of Radiographers.

Society and College of Radiographers (2005) A Strategy for Practice Development in Radiography. London, Society and College of Radiographers.

Society and College of Radiographers (2006) Information management and technology: implications for the radiography workforce. London, Society and College of Radiographers.

Society and College of Radiographers (2008) Information Management and Technology: further advice and guidance on curriculum. London, Society and College of Radiographers.

53

Appendix 1

Group membership

54

Core Project TeamDr Shaaron Pratt (Project Lead) PhD, MEd, TDCR, HDCR, DCR(R), CertEd, FHEA, PRINCE2Lecturer & Radiography Postgraduate Programme Leader, Department of Radiography, Cardiff University.

Mr. Hywel Rogers MSc, DCR(R), PgCE,

Lecturer & Departmental Web Officer Departmental Computer Liaison / IT hardware and Software Officer.

Dr Tina Gambling, PhD, BSc (Hons) Sports Science, BSc (Hons) Radiography

Senior Lecturer (Research), Department of Radiography, Cardiff University.

Dr Paul Brown, PhD, MSc (Econ.), TDCR, HDCR, DCR (T), FE(A)TC, FHEA

Senior Lecturer & Deputy Director, Department of Radiography, Cardiff University.

Steering Group Members

Mr. Andy Thomas MSc, TDCR, HDCR, DCR(R)Radiology Services Manager (Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust)

Mrs. Jane Mathlin, MSc, DCR (T)Lead On-Treatment Review Radiographer (Velindre Hospital NHS Trust)

Mr. Tom Henderson DCR(R)Picture Archive and Communication Systems and Radiology Information Systems Manager, (Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust)

Mr. Matthew Townsend MSc BSc PgD (ME) FHEALecturer (IT Support, School of Healthcare Studies, Cardiff University)

55

Appendix 2

Questionnaire

56

Society of Radiographers Information Management & Technology Survey 2008

For the purposes of this survey, Information Management and Technology (IM&T) is taken to be the processes and technology required to capture, store, distribute and analyse patient and service data.

The questionnaire is split into several sections over three pages, Your Details, IM&T Ability, Work based IM&T Usage, Personal IM&T Usage, Security & Governance Issues, Education & Training Experience and The Future.

Please complete all questions by ticking in a box or entering text. If you are unable to give an answer, please state Not Applicable (N/A) or None where necessary. N/A in table headings is taken to mean Not Applicable or Do Not Use. Please refer to the MORE INFORMATION sheet attached at the end of the questionnaire which gives further details to assist in answering specific questions.

At the end of the questionnaire you have an option to enter the prize draw.

**********************************

Section 1: Your Details

Please indicate:

1. Whether you are a member of the Society and College of radiographers:

Yes No

2. Your gender: Female Male

3. Your age: 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+

4. Your location:

UK Africa

America (Central & South) America (North)

Asia & Far East Australia/New Zealand

Europe India/Pakistan/Bangladesh

Middle East Other (please specify in box below)

57

a. Country: (optional)

Section 1: Your Details (continued)

b. If based in the UK, in which Society of Radiographers region is your workplace located? (Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

Northern Ireland Scotland

Wales England - Eastern

England – London England – Midlands

England - North West England – Northern

England - South East England - South West

England - Yorkshire & North Trent

5. Your highest level of educational qualification:

Diploma e.g. DCR Bachelors Degree Postgraduate Certificate

Postgraduate Diploma Masters Degree Doctorate

Other (please specify in box below)

6. Your place of work and grade:

NHS Trust/Health Board Independent/Private

University Other (please specify in box below)

a. If NHS Trust/Health Board, please indicate your Band/Grade/Title:

Band 5 Band 6 Band 7 Band 8a B a n d

8b Band 8c Band 8d Band 9

b. If Independent/Private, please indicate your Band/Grade/Title (or equivalent):

c. If University, please indicate your grade:

Lecturer Senior Lecturer (Pre-92) Senior Lecturer (Post-92)

Principal Lecturer Professor Other (please specify in box below)

58

d. If Other, please indicate your Band/Grade/Title or equivalent:

Section 1: Your Details (continued)

7. Your radiographic discipline: (If dual qualified, please identify the discipline in which you are currently working.)

Diagnostic Therapeutic

In which area are you predominately working:

Accident & Emergency / Trauma Cardiology/Vascular

Consultant Radiographer (Please specify specialty below) CT

General Radiography (Diagnostic) HE / Student Training

Management / Administration Mould Room

MRI IM&T / Computing

On-treatment Review Paediatrics (Diagnostic)

Paediatrics (Radiotherapy) Radioisotopes/ Nuc. Med.

Radiotherapy Planning RT Pre-treatment

Radiotherapy Treatment Ultrasound

Research Radiographer/Trials Co-ordination Other (please specify in box below)

Consultant Radiographer Speciality:

8. Are you primarily employed as, or undertake a specific IM&T role, in your job/position?

Yes No

If yes, please give further details of what the employment role/position entails:

59

Section 2: Information Management & Technology Ability and Usage

9. Please indicate:

a. what you consider to be your level of IM&T ability:

(where 1 = Beginner to 6 = Expert) 1 2 3 4 5 6

b. how confident you feel in using IM&T applications:

(where 1 = Not Confident to 6 = Very Confident) 1 2 3 4 5 6

c. how important you consider IM&T applications to be in your work:

(where 1 = Not Important to 6 = Very Important) 1 2 3 4 5 6

d. how important you consider IM&T applications to be in your home:

(where 1 = Not Important to 6 = Very Important) 1 2 3 4 5 6

10. Please give further details as to the reason for your answer/s to Question 9:

60

Section 3: Work based IM&T Usage

GENERAL IM&T USAGE

11. For the following generalised IM&T applications/programmes/systems, please indicate which you use, and how often, as part of your work:

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

1 = Daily 5 = Once a month2 = Two to Four days a week 6 = Rarely3 = Once a week 7 = Do Not Use4 = Once a fortnight 8 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Word Processing e.g. Word 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

b. Spreadsheets e.g. Excel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

c. Databases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d. Email 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

e. Internet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

f. Intranet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

g. Presentation/Slideshow 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

h. Data/Statistics e.g. SPSS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

i. Drawing e.g. Corel Draw, Paint 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

j. Graphs Packages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

k. Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

l. Social Networking Websites 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

m. Downloading add-ons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

n. Interactive Display Boards 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

o. Plagiarism Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

p. Referencing Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

q. Educational Support Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

r. Electronic KSF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

s. Maintaining CPD Portfolios 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

t. Electronic Staff Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

u. Other/s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

12. If other/s please specify

61

GENERAL IM&T USAGE

13. For the following specialist IM&T radiographic / healthcare applications /programmes /systems, please indicate which you use, and how often, as part of your work:

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

1 = Daily 5 = Once a month2 = Two to Four days a week 6 = Rarely3 = Once a week 7 = Do Not Use4 = Once a fortnight 8 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Picture Archiving & Communications (PACS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

b. Radiology Information Systems (RIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

c. Hospital Information Systems (HIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d. Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

e. Radiotherapy Treatment Verification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

f. Radiotherapy Patient Management/ Record Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

g. Virtual Training Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

h. Electronic Booking Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

i. Electronic Patient Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

j. Electronic/Remote Reporting inc. Voice Recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

k. Online Test Results 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

l. e-Prescribing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

m. Other/s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

14. If other/s please specify

62

LEVELS of IM&T INVOLVEMENT

15. For each of the following IM&T uses, what level of involvement do you have with the programme? (Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

1 = Standard User 4 = Designer2 = Advanced User (Permission Required) 5 = N/A (Not Applicable)3 = Advanced User (Under own authority)

a. Data Analysis/Reports (Management data, Dept. Statistics etc.) 1 2 3 4 5

b. Spreadsheets 1 2 3 4 5

c. Databases 1 2 3 4 5

d. Images (Clinical Use) 1 2 3 4 5

e. Images (Educational Use) 1 2 3 4 5

f. Picture Archiving & Communications (PACS) 1 2 3 4 5

g. Radiology Information Systems (RIS) 1 2 3 4 5

h. Hospital Information Systems (HIS) 1 2 3 4 5

i. Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems 1 2 3 4 5

j. Radiotherapy Treatment Verification 1 2 3 4 5

k. Electronic Patient Information/Data/ Management Systems 1 2 3 4 5

l. Electronic Booking/Appointment Systems 1 2 3 4 5

m. Electronic/Remote Reporting inc. Voice Recognition 1 2 3 4 5

n. CPD/PDP/eKSF 1 2 3 4 5

o. Management/Administration e.g. Staff Records, Rotas 1 2 3 4 5

63

16. Please indicate how confident you feel in using the following generalised/educational IM&T applications:

1 = Not Confident to 6 = Very ConfidentN/A = Not Applicable to my role OR Do Not Use

a. Word Processing e.g. Word 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

b. Spreadsheets e.g. Excel 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

c. Databases 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

d. Email 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

e. Internet 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

f. Intranet 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

g. Presentation/Slideshow 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

h. Data/Statistics e.g. SPSS 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

i. Drawing e.g. Corel Draw, Paint 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

j. Graphs Packages 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

k. Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

l. Social Networking Websites 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

m. Downloading add-ons 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

n. Interactive Display Boards 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

o. Plagiarism Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

p. Referencing Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

q. Educational Support Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

r. Virtual Training Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

17. Please indicate how confident you feel in using the following specialised radiographic/clinical IM&T applications:

1 = Not Confident to 6 = Very ConfidentN/A = Not Applicable to my role OR Do Not Use

a. Picture Archiving & Communications (PACS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

b. Radiology Information Systems (RIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

c. Hospital Information Systems (HIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

64

d. Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

1 = Not Confident to 6 = Very ConfidentN/A = Not Applicable to my role OR Do Not Use

e. Radiotherapy Treatment Verification 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

f. Radiotherapy Patient Management/ Record Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

g. Electronic Booking Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

h. Electronic Patient Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

i. Electronic/Remote Reporting inc. Voice Recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

j. Online Test Results 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

k. e-Prescribing 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

l. Electronic Knowledge & Skills Framework (e-KSF) 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

m. Maintaining Continuous Professional (CPD) Portfolio / Personal Development Plans (PDP) 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

n. Electronic Staff Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

Section 4: Personal IM&T Usage

GENERAL IM&T USAGE

18. Please indicate which of the following IM&T/electronic applications/programmes /systems/hardware you have/use at home and whether they are for work and/or personal use: (Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

1 = Personal Use Only 3 = Personal and Work Use2 = Work Use Only 4 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Word Processing 1 2 3 4

b. Database 1 2 3 4

65

c. Spreadsheet 1 2 3 4

d. Presentation 1 2 3 4

e. Email 1 2 3 4

f. Internet 1 2 3 4

1 = Personal Use Only 3 = Personal and Work Use2 = Work Use Only 4 = N/A (Not Applicable)

g. Photographic Digital Processing e.g. Photoshop 1 2 3 4

h. Wiki’s, Blogs, Podcasts, Discussion Boards etc. 1 2 3 4

i. Social Networking Websites e.g. Facebook etc. 1 2 3 4

j. Mobile Phone (Basic) 1 2 3 4

k. Mobile Phone (Camera) 1 2 3 4

l. Hand-held Computer e.g. PDA, Blackberry etc. 1 2 3 4

m. MP3/MP4 Player 1 2 3 4

n. Standard Digital Television 1 2 3 4

o. HD Digital Television 1 2 3 4

p. Television Signal Recording Equipment 1 2 3 4 e.g. Sky+ Box / BT Vision / Vplus etc.

q. Other/s 1 2 3 4

19. If other/s please specify

20. If you use the internet at home, what type of access do you have?

Dial-up

Broadband: Cable

Broadband: Fixed-Landline (e.g. Through BT Line)

USB (Mobile Network Provider Device)

66

Other (please specify in box below)

Section 5: Security & Governance Issues

When using IM&T applications in your workplace:

21. Do you utilise SMART card technology?: (Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

Yes No N/A

If yes, please give details of how they have been utilised in practice. Are there any issues that may have arisen e.g. security, training etc.?

22. Are you aware of your responsibilities under the Data Protection Act in respect to IM&T?:

Yes No Unsure

Please explain your answer:

23. If you send / transmit data, do you have the authority to send / transmit it: (Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

1 = Always 3 = Never2 = Occasionally 4 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Internally within the department 1 2 3 4

67

b. Internally within the Trust/University etc. 1 2 3 4

c. Externally, with restrictions e.g. Anonymised 1 2 3 4

d. Externally, without restrictions 1 2 3 4

Section 6: IM&T Education & Training Experience

24. What style/type of IM&T training have you undertaken on the following generalised/educational programmes/applications/systems?

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

(Please tick ONE or MORE that apply)

1 = None/Self-Taught 5 = External Introductory Level Course2 = Informal/Ad Hoc 6 = External Advanced Level Course3 = Internal Introductory Level Course 7 = Don’t Know4 = Internal Advanced Level Course 8 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Word Processing e.g. Word 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

b. Spreadsheets e.g. Excel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

c. Databases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d. Email 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

e. Internet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

f. Intranet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

g. Presentation/Slideshow 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

h. Data/Statistics e.g. SPSS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

i. Drawing e.g. Corel Draw, Paint 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

j. Graphs Packages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

k. Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

l. Social Networking Websites 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

m. Downloading add-ons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

n. Interactive Display Boards 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

o. Plagiarism Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

p. Referencing Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

68

q. Educational Support Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

r. Electronic KSF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

s. Maintaining CPD Portfolios 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

t. Electronic Staff Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

25. For each style/type of training on a particular generalised / educational programme/application/system, in what format did the training take place?

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

(Please tick ONE or MORE that apply)

1 = One-to-one Training2 = Group Training3 = Remote Training Online e.g. Distance Learning4 = Specialist Training by Vendor e.g. Industrial Supplier5 = Don’t Know6 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Word Processing e.g. Word 1 2 3 4 5 6

b. Spreadsheets e.g. Excel 1 2 3 4 5 6

c. Databases 1 2 3 4 5 6

d. Email 1 2 3 4 5 6

e. Internet 1 2 3 4 5 6

f. Intranet 1 2 3 4 5 6

g. Presentation/Slideshow 1 2 3 4 5 6

h. Data/Statistics e.g. SPSS 1 2 3 4 5 6

i. Drawing e.g. Corel Draw, Paint 1 2 3 4 5 6

j. Graphs Packages 1 2 3 4 5 6

k. Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6

l. Social Networking Websites 1 2 3 4 5 6

m. Downloading add-ons 1 2 3 4 5 6

n. Interactive Display Boards 1 2 3 4 5 6

o. Plagiarism Software 1 2 3 4 5 6

p. Referencing Software 1 2 3 4 5 6

q. Educational Support Software 1 2 3 4 5 6

69

r. Electronic KSF 1 2 3 4 5 6

s. Maintaining CPD Portfolios 1 2 3 4 5 6

t. Electronic Staff Records 1 2 3 4 5 6

26. For each particular generalised / educational programme/application/system, what would be your preferred format of training?

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

(Please tick ONE or MORE that apply)

1 = Self-Taught2 = One-to-one Training3 = Group Training4 = Remote Training Online e.g. Distance Learning5 = Specialist Training by Vendor e.g. Industrial Supplier6 = Don’t Know7= N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Word Processing e.g. Word 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

b. Spreadsheets e.g. Excel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

c. Databases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

d. Email 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e. Internet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

f. Intranet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

g. Presentation/Slideshow 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

h. Data/Statistics e.g. SPSS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

i. Drawing e.g. Corel Draw, Paint 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

j. Graphs Packages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

k. Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

l. Social Networking Websites 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

m. Downloading add-ons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

n. Interactive Display Boards 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

o. Plagiarism Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

p. Referencing Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

q. Educational Support Software 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

r. Electronic KSF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

70

s. Maintaining CPD Portfolios 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

t. Electronic Staff Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

27. What style/type of IM&T training have you undertaken on the following specialist radiographic/clinical programmes/applications/systems?

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

(Please tick ONE or MORE that apply)

1 = None/Self-Taught 5 = External Introductory Level Course2 = Informal/Ad Hoc 6 = External Advanced Level Course3 = Internal Introductory Level Course 7 = Don’t Know4 = Internal Advanced Level Course 8 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Picture Archiving & Communications (PACS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

b. Radiology Information Systems (RIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

c. Hospital Information Systems (HIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d. Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

e. Radiotherapy Treatment Verification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

f. Radiotherapy Patient Management/ Record Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

g. Virtual Training Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

h. Electronic Booking Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

i. Electronic Patient Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

j. Electronic/Remote Reporting inc. Voice Recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

k. Online Test Results 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

71

l. e-Prescribing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

28. For each style/type of training on a particular specialist radiographic / clinical programme/application/system, in what format did the training take place?

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

(Please tick ONE or MORE that apply)

1 = One-to-one Training2 = Group Training3 = Remote Training Online e.g. Distance Learning4 = Specialist Training by Vendor e.g. Industrial Supplier5 = Don’t Know6 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Picture Archiving & Communications (PACS) 1 2 3 4 5 6

b. Radiology Information Systems (RIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6

c. Hospital Information Systems (HIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6

d. Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6

e. Radiotherapy Treatment Verification 1 2 3 4 5 6

f. Radiotherapy Patient Management/ Record Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6

g. Virtual Training Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6

h. Electronic Booking Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6

i. Electronic Patient Records 1 2 3 4 5 6

j. Electronic/Remote Reporting inc. Voice Recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6

72

k. Online Test Results 1 2 3 4 5 6

l. e-Prescribing 1 2 3 4 5 6

29. For each particular specialist radiographic/clinical programme/application/system, what would be your preferred format of training?

(Please see MORE INFORMATION sheet for details)

(Please tick ONE or MORE that apply)

1 = Self-Taught2 = One-to-one Training3 = Group Training4 = Remote Training Online e.g. Distance Learning5 = Specialist Training by Vendor e.g. Industrial Supplier6 = Don’t Know7 = N/A (Not Applicable)

a. Picture Archiving & Communications (PACS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

b. Radiology Information Systems (RIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

c. Hospital Information Systems (HIS) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

d. Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e. Radiotherapy Treatment Verification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

f. Radiotherapy Patient Management/ Record Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

g. Virtual Training Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

h. Electronic Booking Systems 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

73

i. Electronic Patient Records 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

j. Electronic/Remote Reporting inc. Voice Recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

k. Online Test Results 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

l. e-Prescribing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

30. Do you have any qualifications in IM&T?: (Tick all that apply)

No Certificate/s of Attendance

Internal Workbased Certificate/s of Attainment GCSE or equivalent

NVQ BSc or equivalent

Masters Doctorate

ECDL ICDL

CLAIT Other (Please specify:)

Section 7: The Future?

31. What IM&T skills do you consider necessary for radiographers in the future?

(Please explain your answer)

74

32. Please identify any future aspects of IM&T which you think may be useful to radiographers or you would like/want to see in practice:

(Please explain your answer)

75

33. What barriers (if any) do you think there are to the use of IM&T?

(Please explain your answer)

34. What barriers (if any) do you think there are to IM&T training/education?

76

(Please explain your answer)

35. Please add/make any comment/s you wish in respect to IM&T and radiographers:

Thank you for completing the Society & College of Radiographers Information Management and Technology Survey 2008.