Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36798619›Full record

ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2023

Assessment of MRI Safety Practices in Saudi Arabia.

Sami A Alghamdi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sami A AlghamdiRadiological Sciences Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-6404-8762

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is to investigate the safety practices used by MRI departments in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional study across 113 private and public hospitals was conducted in Saudi Arabia. A survey questionnaire was designed and sent to 113 MRI units. The questionnaire consisted of 43 items under 14 sections for the assessment of MRI safety practices. These 14 sections are related to (i) MRI and its safety, (ii) MRI usage and its safety, and (iii) safety of the MRI technologists and reporting of adverse effects during the usage. The American College of Radiology (ACR) guidance document on MRI safety practices was used as a template for this survey. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistical software for Windows version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results: Of the 43 items assessed, only 3 items' binary responses (Yes & No) did not differ much. A greater proportion of positive responses for 40 items (93%) regarding MRI safety practices. More than 50% of the participants claimed that their departments lacked a Magnetic Resonance Safety Officer (MRSO). Regarding regular safety training programs, less than 50% received training in MRI safety. Handheld metal detectors were found in only 39% of the MRI units. Conclusion: The majority of MRI units in Saudi Arabia have demonstrated compliance with majority of ACR MRI safety recommendations; nonetheless, there are two main items for which the guidelines may not be attained: MRSO and regular MRI safety training programs. By taking into account the limitations of this study, it is strongly recommended to assign MRSO and implement annual MRI safety training to improve MRI safety practices for both patients and healthcare workers.

Indexed as

2020 American College of Radiology guidelinesACRmagnetic resonance imagingMRIsafetySaudi Arabia

Identifiers

PMID36798619
PMCPMC9926921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.