Radiation risk perception among parents and legal representatives of children undergoing radiological examinations

Risk communication is one of the stages of health risk analysis and is an interactive process of exchange of information and opinions about risks, including medical risks, between risk assessment specialists, decision makers, the media, stakeholder groups and the public. In organizing interaction with stakeholders in the risk communication process, sociological research helps to explore the attitudes of the actors. One of risk communication situations in the field of radiation protection is information provision to patients and their legal representatives about radiation health risks due to the medical radiology examinations. The aim of this study was to assess the radiation risk perception among parents and legal representatives of children undergoing radiological examinations. Parents and legal representatives of children undergoing hospital treatment from November 2021 to March 2022 were interviewed in a large pediatric infectious diseases hospital. A questionnaire designed at St. Petersburg Research Institute of Radiation Hygiene was used for the interviews. In total, 125 people were interviewed. The study showed that there were no significant differences in the perception of radiation risks among parents and legal representatives of children undergoing inpatient treatment with different socio-demographic characteristics. The level of knowledge was not identified as a factor shaping a tolerant attitude toward medical radiation risks. Parents and legal representatives of children undergoing hospital treatment show high rates of trust in the attending physicians and medicine in general. The study results show that those who have been informed about the risks generally have lower risk perception for radiological medical examinations than those who have not been informed about the risks.

1. Health and the environment: principles of risk communication. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2013. 68 p. (in Russian)

2. Repin LV, Biblin AM, Vishnyakova NM. Problems of risk communication related to the provision of the radiation safety. Basic concepts and definitions. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2018;11(3): 83-91. (In Russian) https://doi.org/10.21514/1998-426X-2018-11-3-83-91

3. Cho KW, Cantone MC, Kurihara-Saio C, Le Guen B, Martinez N, Oughton D, et al. ICRP publication 138: ethical foundations of the system of radiological protection. Annals of the ICRP. 2018.47(1): 1-65. DOI: 10.1177/0146645317746010

4. American college of radiology. Appropriateness Criteria for diagnostic procedures. Available from: https://acsearch.acr.org/list [Accessed: 03.04.2022]

5. How to Understand and Communicate Radiation Risk. Available from: https://www.imagewisely.org/-/media/Image-Wisely/Files/CT/IW-Peck-Samei-Radiation-Risk.pdf [Accessed: 05.04.2022]

6. World Health Organization. Communicating radiation risks in pediatric imaging: information to support health care discussions about benefit and risk. 2016. 94 р.

7. Broder JS, Frush DP. Content and style of radiation risk communication for pediatric patients. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2014.11(3): 238-242. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.10.003

8. Lam DL, Larson DB, Eisenberg JB. Communicating potential radiation-induced cancer risks from medical imaging directly to patients. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2015.205(5): 962-970. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.15.15057

9. Lowe S. Diagnostic imaging in pregnancy: Making informed decisions. Obstet Med. 2019;12(3): 116-22. DOI: 10.1177/1753495X19838658

10. Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA. Helping patients decide: ten steps to better risk communication. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2011.103(19): 1436-1443. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr318

11. Balonov MI, Golikov VYu, Vodovatov AV, Chipiga LA, Zvonova IA, Kalnitsky SA, et al. Scientific bases of radiation protection in modern medicine. Volume 1. Radiation diagnostics. Edited by Balonov MI. Saint-Petersburg: Institute of Radiation Hygiene; 2019. Vol. 1. 320 p. (In Russian)

12. Repin LV, Biblin AM, Vishnyakova NM, Sokolov NV, Davydov AA. Problems of risk communication: methodological approaches to the use of sociological data in planning of information work with the population on radiation safety issues. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2019;12(3): 50-57. (In Russian) DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2019-12-3-50-57

13. Zubkova NS, Kopylovich MV, Gorbacheva OI. The role of a nurse in conducting fluorographic examination of patients. Youth and XXI century 2020. Proceedings of conference, Kursk, 19-20 February, 2020. P. 362-364. (In Russian)

14. Safronov VV, Davydov AA, Vodovatov AV, Startseva OI, Biblin AM, Repin LV. Assessment of the medical radiation and nonradiation risks for the patients undergoing the surgical gender reassignment from female to male. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2020;13(2): 99-113. (In Russian) DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2020-13-2-99-113

15. Davydov AA, Biblin AM, Kononenko DV. Radon risk communication issues: results of the all-russian public opinion survey. Health Risk Analysis. 2021;3: 29–41. DOI: 10.21668/health.risk/2021.3.03.eng

16. Zykova IA, Arkhangelskaya GV, Zvonova IA. Chernobyl and society: risk assessment. SPb: MAPO-NIIRG; 2001. 140 p. (In Russian)

17. Zykova IA, Zelentsova SA, Arkhangelskaya GV. Information requirements of population in different radiation-hygienic situations. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2013;6(4): 11-18. (In Russian).

18. Biblin AM, Arkhangelskaya GA, Zelentsova SA, Khramtsov EV, Akhmatdinov RR, Sokolov NV, et al. Riskcommunication issues in radiation safety: preferences of the public in the Leningrad and Murmansk regions on the sources of information. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2018;11(2): 60-73. (In Russian) DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2018-11-2-60-73

19. Arkhagelskaya GV, Zykova IA, Zelentsova SA. The difficulties of informing the population on the issues of radiation protection. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2014;7(2): 42-49. (In Russian)

20. Public Opinion Foundation. Trust in doctors and medical institutions. 2014. Available from: https://fom.ru/Zdorove-isport/11765 [Accessed 03.05.2022]. (In Russian)

21. Public Opinion Foundation. Trust in doctors. 2019. Available from: https://fom.ru/Zdorove-i-sport/14208 [Accessed 03.05.2022]. (In Russian)

22. All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion. Physician in Russia: trust of patients, income, position in society. 2017. Available from: https://old.wciom.ru/index.php?id=236&uid=3590 [Accessed 03.05.2022] (In Russian)

23. Arkhagelskaya GV, Zelentsova SA. Ways to optimize the risk communication between specialists on radiation safety and population: recommendations on communication language. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2019;12(4): 72-77. (In Russian) DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2019-12-4-72-77.