Sustainability of medical imaging: Proposed licensing system and consent procedure are impractical

doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1201

BMJ 2004;328:1201 (15 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1201

Letter

Sustainability of medical imaging

Proposed licensing system and consent procedure are impractical

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—It is difficult to argue with Picano's premisethat it would be a good thing if the doctors who referred patientsfor examinations using ionising radiation had a clearer ideaof the risks involved.¹ However, Hardingham is right to pointout that his suggested solution of a "driving licence" is completelyimpractical, and is based on a misunderstanding of the currentlegislation for the protection of patients.²

The licensing system he proposes would be bureaucratic and impossibleto administer. It is also unnecessary. The legislation makesit quite clear that the referrer's responsibility is to providethe practitioner with sufficient information to decide whetherthe examination is justified. Whenever possible, that practitionershould be the radiologist (or nuclear medicine doctor) responsiblefor performing and reporting the examination, who will hopefullyhave the requisite knowledge of the radiation hazard and willbe able to make an informed judgment.

If . . . [Full text of this article]

Bob Bury, consultant radiologist

Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds LS1 3EX bob.bury@leedsth.nhs.uk