Radiological Emergency Preparedness: A Survey of Nuclear Medicine Technologists in the United States

Article Figures & Data

TABLE 1

Descriptive Variables

Variable	Description	n
Credentials (n = 846)	Certified (NMTCB or ARRT)	833 (98.46%)
	Other	13 (1.54%)
	Missing	4
Region of United States (n = 832)	Northeast	334 (40.14%)
	Northwest	117 (14.06%)
	Southeast	222 (26.68%)
	Southwest	159 (19.11%)
	Missing	18
Years of work experience (n = 847)	<20 y	364 (42.98%)
	≥20 y	483 (57.02%)
	Missing	3
Work setting (n = 841)	Academia	51 (6.06%)
	Hospital	502 (59.69%)
	Outpatient center	166 (19.74%)
	Other	122 (14.51%)
	Missing	9
Has the facility in which you work adopted and implemented an emergency preparedness plan that includes radiological disaster preparedness? (n = 836)	Yes	514 (61.48%)
	No	322 (38.52%)
	Missing	14
Have you attended radiation emergency preparedness training in the last 5 y? (n = 839)	Yes	296 (35.28%)
	No	543 (64.72%)
	Missing	11
Equipment availability
Scintillation γ-camera (n = 832)	Yes	758 (91.11%)
	No	74 (8.89%)
	Missing	18
Well counter (n = 832)	Yes	715 (85.94%)
	No	117 (14.06%)
	Missing	18
Geiger counter (n = 837)	Yes	810 (96.77%)
	No	27 (3.23%)
	Missing	13
Thyroid probe (n = 817)	Yes	535 (65.48%)
	No	282 (34.52%)
	Missing	33
Portal monitor (n = 782)	Yes	148 (18.93%)
	No	634 (81.07%)
	Missing	68
Portable multichannel analyzer (n = 790)	Yes	173 (21.90%)
	No	617 (78.10%)
	Missing	60

TABLE 2

Radiation Detection, Monitoring, and Imaging Equipment Availability by Work Setting

Setting	Scintillation γ-camera	Well counter	Geiger counter	Thyroid probe	Portal monitor	Portable multichannel analyzer
Academia	28 (57.14%)	37 (74.00%)	46 (92.00%)	31 (63.27%)	12 (25.53%)	16 (34.04%)
Hospital	495 (99.40%)	455 (91.55%)	499 (100.00%)	420 (85.37%)	113 (24.25%)	130 (27.54%)
Outpatient center	147 (90.74%)	134 (82.21%)	163 (98.79%)	36 (23.08%)	10 (6.45%)	8 (5.16%)
Other	83 (70.34%)	85 (73.28%)	97 (82.91%)	45 (39.13%)	12 (11.01%)	19 (17.12%)

TABLE 3

Knowledge of the Use of Equipment in a Radiological Response by Years of Work Experience

TABLE 4

Continuing Education, Familiarity with Preparedness Materials, and Volunteer Programs

Continuing education and preparedness materials	Yes (n)	No (n)	Missing (n)
Does VOICE or other continuing education programs include training for radiological disaster procedures? (n = 821)	218 (26.6%)	603 (73.4%)	29
Are you familiar with the REMM program provided by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services? (n = 836)	190 (22.7%)	646 (77.3%)	14
Are you familiar with the CDC’s guidance titled, “Use of Radiation Detection, Measuring, and Imaging Instruments to Assess Internal Contamination from Intakes of Radionuclides?” (n = 834)	191 (22.9%)	643 (77.1%)	16
Are you a member or have you signed up to volunteer through any of the following?
ESAR-VHP (n = 840)	18 (2.1%)	822 (97.9%)	10
MMRS (n = 833)	8 (1.0%)	825 (99.0%)	17
MRC (n = 835)	18 (2.2%)	817 (97.8%)	15

TABLE 5

Differences in Familiarity and Willingness to Respond by Radiological Preparedness Training

	No training in the last 5 y		Training within the last 5 y
Parameter	Yes (n)	No (n)	Yes (n)	No (n)	Missing (n)	χ²	P
Familiarity with REMM (n = 834)	69(12.78% )	471 (87.22%)	120 (40.82%)	174 (59.18%)	16	85.3880	<0.0001
Familiarity with CDC guidance (n = 832)	81 (15.03%)	458 (84.97%)	109 (37.20%)	184 (62.80%)	18	52.9616	<0.0001
Willingness to respond to…
Nuclear reactor accident (n = 768)	404 (84.70%)	73 (15.30%)	276 (94.85%)	15 (5.15%)	82	14.1516	0.0002
Nuclear weapon detonation (n = 825)	437 (82.14%)	95 (17.86%)	265 (90.44%)	28 (9.56%)	25	10.2620	0.0014
Dirty bomb detonation (n = 831)	451 (83.83%)	87 (16.17%)	273 (93.17%)	20 (6.83%)	19	14.7670	0.0001