의료기사 등에 관한 법률에서 ‘의사 또는 치과의사의 지도’ 문구에 대한 법률 개정 요구도

The purpose of this study is to check the extent to which “instruction of physician or dentist” defined in the Medical Service Technologists, etc. Act is applied in relation to radiography examination procedures for radiological technologists. In addition, it is intended to present basic data on the requirement to revise the Medical Service Technologists, etc. Act in the radiological technologist's duty area and scope of work, The subjects of this study were radiological technologists with license, and the response data were collected after sending the questionnaire link written on the online questionnaire form. The final number of respondents were 1,018, and the response rate was 6.8%. Most of the negative responses were “I have never received ‘instruction’ for radiologic examination by a physician or dentist, including a radiologist in a medical environment.” There were a high perception that “the professionalism in radiation examination on radiological technologists are higher than that of a physician or dentist.” They answered that the current continuing education has a great impact on maintaining and continuing professionalism and learning new knowledge in the radiology field. In addition, the radiological technologists provide a very high level of education in areas related to radiography procedure ethics such as patient care, patient safety, and patient privacy protection, as well as specialized fields such as radiation-related examination methods, radiography examination dose, and patient exposure dose. Radiological technologists replied that they were receiving it consistently. In conclusion, in the current medical environment, the ‘instruction’ of a physician or dentist cannot be seen as being realistically performed. The phrase ‘instruction’ of a physician or dentist as defined in the Medical Service Technologists, etc. Act is considered inappropriate in respect of the fact that the state recognizes the qualifications of the medical service technologist through a license. It is thought that revision to a new term suitable for the current medical environment is necessary.