Managing acoustic noise within MRI: A qualitative interview study among Swedish radiographers

A Glans; J Wilén; B Hansson; Å Audulv; L Lindgren

doi:10.1016/j.radi.2024.04.002

Managing acoustic noise within MRI: A qualitative interview study among Swedish radiographers

Radiography (Lond). 2024 Apr 10;30(3):889-895. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.04.002. Online ahead of print.

Authors

A Glans¹, J Wilén², B Hansson³, Å Audulv⁴, L Lindgren⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. Electronic address: anton.glans@umu.se.
² Department of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
³ Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Diagnostic Radiology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
⁴ Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

PMID: 38603992
DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.04.002

Abstract

Introduction: Acoustic noise from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can cause hearing loss and needs to be mitigated to ensure the safety of patients and personnel. Capturing MR personnel's insights is crucial for guiding the development and future applications of noise-reduction technology. This study aimed to explore how MR radiographers manage acoustic noise in clinical MR settings.

Methods: Using a qualitative design, we conducted semi-structured individual interviews with fifteen MR radiographers from fifteen hospitals around Sweden. We focused on the clinical implications of participants' noise management, using an interpretive description approach. We also identified sociotechnical interactions between People, Environment, Tools, and Tasks (PETT) by adopting a Human Factors/Ergonomics framework. Interview data were analyzed inductively with thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke).

Results: The analysis generated three main themes regarding MR radiographers' noise management: (I) Navigating Occupational Noise: Risk Management and Adaptation; (II) Protecting the Patient and Serving the Exam, and (III) Establishing a Safe Healthcare Environment with Organizational Support.

Conclusion: This study offers insights into radiographers' experiences of managing acoustic noise within MRI, and the associated challenges. Radiographers have adopted multiple strategies to protect patients and themselves from adverse noise-related effects. However, they require tools and support to manage this effectively, suggesting a need for organizations to adopt more proactive, holistic approaches to safety initiatives.

Implications for practice: The radiographers stressed the importance of a soundproofed work environment to minimize occupational adverse health effects and preserve work performance. They acknowledge noise as a common contributor to patient distress and discomfort. Providing options like earplugs, headphones, mold putty, software-optimized "quiet" sequences, and patient information were important tools. Fostering a safety culture requires proactive safety efforts and support from colleagues and management.

Keywords: Acoustic noise; Human factors; MRI safety; Occupational health; Patient safety; Thematic analysis.