This direct comparison of outcome, where one profession has been substituted for another with regard to a specific task, has been criticized in the nursing literature. As a result, much of the research literature surrounding advanced radiography practice has focused on specific advanced practice roles, 20– 22 often comparing the technical skills and competencies of radiographers with those of the delegating radiologist. However, despite the validity of this efficiency argument, advanced practice opportunities for radiographers have historically been driven by the limited availability of radiologists within a local setting. 17, 18 This is particularly true within diagnostic imaging, if the UK Government aspirations for 7-day working 19 are to be achieved without accruing excessive costs. 14– 16 It has also been argued that efficiencies within healthcare delivery can be achieved only through developing new models of care that build on the knowledge and skills of the whole workforce. The introduction of advanced practice roles is often cited as being driven by increasing demands for imaging services and the concomitant shortage of radiologists. 13 A further 1288 radiographers are also reported to be undertaking postgraduate education with the intention of working as an advanced practitioner and providing clinical expertise and leadership within a defined area of practice on qualification. 8– 12 Today, advanced radiographer practitioners are an integral part of the imaging and oncology workforce, with an estimated 3662 diagnostic radiographers in the UK employed in advanced practice roles and 86 in consultant roles. Advanced radiographic practice has been the focus of much discussion and debate over the past 15 years, 1– 6 not only within the UK, where advanced practitioner roles are recognized within the national career framework, 7 but also internationally.
0 kommentar(er)
