Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Future Healthcare Journal

  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Future Healthcare Journal

futurehosp Logo
  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Response

Nada Al-Hadithy, Rebecca Nicholas, Katie Knight, Rose Penfold, Greta Mclachlan and Lucia Magee
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/fhj.Let.9.1.2
Future Healthc J March 2022
Nada Al-Hadithy
Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
Roles: Plastic surgery trainee
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebecca Nicholas
Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
Roles: Plastic surgery trainee
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Katie Knight
North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
Roles: Paediatric emergency medicine consultant
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rose Penfold
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
Roles: Academic clinical fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Greta Mclachlan
Cleveland Clinic London Hospital, London, UK
Roles: Higher surgical trainee, Kent, Surrey, and Sussex Deanery, and leadership fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lucia Magee
St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
Roles: Academic clinical fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Editor – We thank Dr Wood for their letter. While they are right that we should be practising evidence-based medicine, there is sadly no consistency in how this evidence is applied to pregnant NHS workers in the UK. In addition, there are no studies on the safe levels of technetium 99 exposure to the in utero fetus. Occupational radiation exposure is regulated by the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposures) Regulations, however, probably not that tightly in theatres. Of all of our respondents, no one raised the point that they had been offered a dosimeter and, as a pregnant surgical trainee (possibly the most male dominant of all specialities), I was never offered dosimeters despite repeatedly asking for them from my line manager (I did find the radiation officer independently and, after a few weeks, got one). There were no maternity leads available and there was no information about double thickness leads. There was no discussion about the distance of the fetus / gravid uterus away from the radiation source nor the safe handling of radiation-contaminated waste products. In short, the risk assessment was not fit for purpose.

While we appreciate that many radiographers wear dosimeters, sadly this is not the case in surgery. Furthermore, where should this dosimeter be placed? Inside the lead gown or outside it? I was not given two, and the one I received I was told I could only have for a short period as it belonged to another radiographer. Therefore, this figure of 1 mSv over the course of the pregnancy is not being properly tracked for the majority of clinical pregnant NHS staff working outside of the radiology department.

The purpose of this article was to raise awareness of the poor risk assessments and lack of consistent guidance across the NHS on clinical occupational hazards for pregnant NHS employees. As a pregnant surgical trainee, I was told to wear leads to protect the fetus from radiation from sentinel lymph node biopsies performed in theatre. I was also told that it did not harm the fetus. Lead does not stop gamma radiation. The guidance was not provided on accurate evidence-based medicine. I had no appropriate risk assessment. Tragically my baby had fatal anomalies.

This article did not state that employers should prevent pregnant employees from performing this part of their role; it asked for each pregnant woman to be given the option. Each woman has the right to choose how to conduct herself during her pregnancy when presented with all the relevant information. This article was written to highlight the plight of many pregnant women who have come to harm from inadequate risk assessments and poor guidance.

Thank you again for your interest in the article, if it provokes attention and discussion then it has achieved its purpose.

  • © Royal College of Physicians 2022. All rights reserved.
Back to top
Previous article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Response
Nada Al-Hadithy, Rebecca Nicholas, Katie Knight, Rose Penfold, Greta Mclachlan, Lucia Magee
Future Healthc J Mar 2022, 9 (1) 96-97; DOI: 10.7861/fhj.Let.9.1.2

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Response
Nada Al-Hadithy, Rebecca Nicholas, Katie Knight, Rose Penfold, Greta Mclachlan, Lucia Magee
Future Healthc J Mar 2022, 9 (1) 96-97; DOI: 10.7861/fhj.Let.9.1.2
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • What is the impact of COVID-19 on complaints against doctors?
  • The significance of the gut microbiome in post-COVID-19 gastrointestinal symptoms
  • Optimisation of strategies for management of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction
Show more Letters to the editor

Similar Articles

FAQs

  • Difficulty logging in.

There is currently no login required to access the journals. Please go to the home page and simply click on the edition that you wish to read. If you are still unable to access the content you require, please let us know through the 'Contact us' page.

  • Can't find the CME questionnaire.

The read-only self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ) can be found after the CME section in each edition of Clinical Medicine. RCP members and fellows (using their login details for the main RCP website) are able to access the full SAQ with answers and are awarded 2 CPD points upon successful (8/10) completion from:  https://cme.rcplondon.ac.uk

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home

Other Services

  • Advertising
futurehosp Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians