Lasya Daggumati - Department of Interventional Radiology
When performing interventional procedures in gynecology and obstetrics, safety checklists have been introduced to standardize procedures and enhance patient safety. One noteworthy outcome of a study discussing the safety of these procedures is the recognition of checklists as a potent tool for reducing errors and adverse events as well as helping with communication among healthcare teams to prevent wrong-site or wrong-procedure interventions. Common interventions during pregnancies include conditions such as ectopic/scar pregnancies, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. Regardless of the procedure done, interventional radiologists should personally discuss procedures with patients and obtain their consent. If a procedure involves higher radiation levels, potential radiation risks should be discussed, and the medical records should indicate the estimated radiation dose along with instructions for follow-up care.
There's a growing recognition of the need for standardization in interventional radiology to enhance patient safety and treatment quality. The article suggests that interventional radiology procedures are becoming a preferred alternative to surgical interventions in gynecological and obstetric cases. In fact, in the future, there might be an increased focus on training programs and collaborative efforts between interventional radiologists, surgeons, and other medical professionals to ensure comprehensive patient care. Lastly, with a growing emphasis on informed consent and patient-centered communication, the future could see increased attention to ethical and legal aspects of interventional radiology procedures. Clear communication, proper documentation, and adherence to regulations will be crucial.
References:
Pinto, A., Giurazza, F., Califano, T., Rea, G., Valente, T., Niola, R., & Caranci, F. (2021). Interventional radiology in gynecology and obstetric practice: Safety issues. Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR, 42(1), 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2020.09.004
Comments