Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction: The safety of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is a paramount concern in contemporary healthcare, as the strong magnetic fields and radiofrequency energy bring about particular hazards. Healthcare Workers (HCWs) need adequate knowledge, a positive attitude, and consistent safe practices to prevent adverse events related to MRI. Tertiary care hospitals are particularly high-risk environments because of the volume and complexity of imaging performed. Aim: To assess awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding MRI safety among HCWs. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted in the Department of Radiodiagnosis, Dr. D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India, from November 2025 to March 2026. Convenience sampling was used to recruit 47 HCWs who had received MRI safety training. A structured, self-administered questionnaire assessed socio-demographic profiles, knowledge, attitudes, practices, and awareness across zones: Knowledge domain: six questions; Attitude domain: three questions; Practice domain: three questions; MRI Zone Awareness: five questions. Results: Most participants were aged 25-30 years (n=31, 66.0%), and most were physicians (n=29, 61.7%). General knowledge was good, with (n=45, 95.7%) correctly identifying MRI at involving non-ionising radiation and (n=47, 100%) correctly identifying metal objects as the main MRI hazard. However, a significant gap emerged: only (n=19, 40.4%) correctly categorised pacemakers and cochlear implants as unsafe in MRI, while (n=25, 53.2%) incorrectly considered them safe. Attitudes were strongly positive, with (n=43, 91.5%) strongly agreeing that MRI safety is important. Adherence to patient safety practices was 100%. Overall awareness of MRI safety zones was relatively good, although substantial misunderstanding of zone restrictions was observed. Conclusion: HCWs demonstrated high general MRI safety awareness and positive attitudes; however, critical gaps remained in implant safety knowledge and incident-reporting culture.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kangane et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: