Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41299647›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

Infection prevention and control in the CT suite: a qualitative study with Australian radiographers in intravenous contrast administration.

Dania Abu Awwad, Suzanne Hill, Sarah Lewis, Yobelli Jimenez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Knowledge, attitudes, and practice of infection control in radiation therapy departments.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026
    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

4 authors.

Dania Abu AwwadDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. dania.abuawwad@sydney.edu.au.
Suzanne HillDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Sarah LewisDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Yobelli JimenezDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin radiology departments, computed tomography (CT) has been identified as presenting a higher risk of infection compared to other imaging modalities. CT scanning often deploys contrast injectors to administer iodine contrast intravenously, which poses infection risks for patients and staff. The aim of this study was to explore the variations in practice and the enablers and barriers to infection prevention and control (IPC) practices in the CT suite in Australia.

methodsSemi-structured focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted over three sessions with thirteen registered radiographers, who had expressed interest in participating in FGDs after completing a survey on IPC knowledge and practice. The FGDs ran for one hour and questions focused on workplace surveillance, IPC education, risks associated with different components of contrast injectors, and variations between staff. FGDs were transcribed verbatim and coded using thematic analysis to identify key themes and concepts.

resultsThree key themes arose from the focus group discussions: 'Communication and Education in Radiology', 'Safety in CT', and 'Injection Technology'. Participants described general IPC modules, most of which did not relate to the CT environment. In hospital settings, IPC policies were often considered broad, and participants described having no written policies relating to IPC and the CT contrast injector. IPC safety was impacted by other staff members, particularly staff from other departments who assist with connecting the CT injector but were often not familiar with CT equipment. CT injectors have connection points that must remain sterile and poor adherence to IPC practices will increase the risk of infections. The number of connection points are less in multi-use injectors compared to single-use injectors, hence, there was a perceived advantage with multi-use injectors. However, single-use injectors were used for infectious patients if available for easier cleaning.

conclusionThe lack of CT-specific IPC training and policies led to variations in practice between staff in the CT suite. Training and resources focused on radiology settings and scenarios are needed and would benefit both radiology staff and other wards that require radiology services.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaCross InfectionInfection ControlRadiology Department, HospitalTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdministration, IntravenousAdultAustraliaFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleQualitative ResearchContrast MediaComputed tomographyContrast injectorsInfection controlRadiographersRadiology department

Identifiers

PMID41299647
PMCPMC12659481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.