Abstract
Background: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is an essential diagnostic modality in modern healthcare due to its superior imaging capabilities and lack of ionizing radiation. However, MRI environments present unique safety risks related to strong magnetic fields, radiofrequency energy, and ferromagnetic materials, requiring strict adherence to safety standards and well-trained personnel. In South Africa, particularly within public academic hospitals, disparities in MRI availability and inconsistencies in MRI safety knowledge, attitudes, and practices among personnel have been reported. Despite international guidelines such as the American College of Radiology (ACR) Manual on MR Safety, limited evidence exists regarding the combined assessment of MRI scanner availability and MR personnel safety practices in Gauteng academic hospitals.
Aim and Methods: This study aimed to assess the availability of MRI scanners and to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, and safety practices of MRI personnel working in academic hospitals in Gauteng Province, South Africa. A descriptive cross-sectional study design was employed. Data were collected from permanently employed MR personnel across Gauteng-based academic hospitals using a structured, self-administered questionnaire developed in line with American College of Radiology on MR safety, and South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) safety guidelines. An inventory checklist was used to assess MRI scanner availability and operational characteristics. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation analysis to determine relationships between knowledge, attitude, and safety practice scores.
Results: Most MRI facilities reported having accredited scanners, routine maintenance programmes, and quality control procedures. Overall, MR personnel demonstrated moderate to high levels of safety knowledge and generally positive attitudes towards MRI safety practices. However, notable gaps were identified in areas such as implant safety, MRI zoning, emergency preparedness, colour-coded equipment identification, and screening of non-MR personnel. Statistically significant positive correlations were observed between knowledge and practice (r = 0.312; p = 0.023) and between attitude and practice (r = 0.593; p < 0.001), with attitude showing the strongest association with safe practice.
Conclusion: While MR personnel in Gauteng academic hospitals demonstrate a foundational level of MRI safety awareness and compliance, critical gaps in knowledge and safety practices persist. Strengthening structured MR personnel safety training, improving infrastructure, and enhancing policy enforcement are essential to improving MRI safety operations and reducing preventable risks within the public healthcare sector.