Insights About Nuclear Medicine Technology: Findings from a 2006 Survey of NMT Education Program Directors

REPLY: Let me begin with a clarification. My colleague, Margaret Langelier, and I at the Center for Health Workforce Studies at the University at Albany were the authors of the article in question. Ms. Prekeges is correct that many of our recommendations coincide with positions taken by the SNMTS leadership in recent years. This is true not because we were trying to endear ourselves to SNMTS leaders but because, based on our judgment about what would be best for the nuclear medicine technologist (NMT) profession, we believe that our recommendations are appropriate ways to build the status and reputation of the NMT profession, and ultimately, to better serve people needing nuclear medicine procedures.

A second clarification is that the full report on which the article is based is posted on the SNM Web site, though not perhaps in the most logical location. The URL is http://interactive.snm.org/docs/NMT_Educator_Report_2006.pdf.

Margie and I made a serious attempt in this report to “capture the diversity of opinion among program directors.” We recognize that, as is true in many health professions, recommendations to upgrade the basic academic credential to the BS degree will be viewed unfavorably by directors of associate degree programs. On the other hand, we also recognize that other “superior” professions often find it difficult to include professionals with “only” associate degree credentials in serious policy discussions, even though the individuals might bring as much or more insight and intellect to the discussion as those in their own profession.

In her second example, Ms. Prekeges is correct that our survey asked about current practices, and our recommendations are opinions about what we think would be appropriate for the NMT profession. We did make an effort to distinguish the two by including our recommendations in a separate section in the article, but perhaps we should have been more explicit about what was based on survey responses and what was our expert opinion. In any case, we hope that readers take to heart our recommendations, which are based on a variety of sources and experiences. We believe that failure to follow through with some of them could jeopardize the future of the NMT profession.