Abstract
Introduction: To ensure medical radiation workers are protected from excessive ionising radiation exposure, they were provided with personal dosimeters to monitor the accumulated radiation dose. However, previous assessments revealed that the use of a personal dosimeter was not satisfactory in many countries. The reasons for non-adherence were previously recorded, including forgetfulness, unavailability, late supply, no supervision, and the device’s physical factor. A few demographic and occupation factors influenced the consistent device use, such as age, gender, education, years of experience, type of hospital and working hour. However, a fixed conclusion cannot be made from these factors because human behaviour is unpredictable and complex. Therefore, we have successfully validated a research model by integrating the leading behaviour theories, Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). This model attempts to explain personal dosimeter use among the medical radiation workers using latent behavioural constructs. We believe this is the first effort to truly understand the workers’ actual practice towards personal radiation monitoring in Malaysia.
Method: A validated survey link was distributed to the institution coordinators (n=73) priorly assigned by the head of departments who
agreed to participate in the study. The coordinators were requested to disseminate the survey link to other eligible
workers in the department on two separate occasions over eight weeks between April and June 2019. The respondents
were assured that all answers were anonymous, and the investigators were blinded to respondents’ identities.
Participants’ responses were accrued through the SurveyMonkey web site, which was only accessible to the investigators.
The final data were exported to MS Excel and Smart-PLS 3 to be analysed further.
Results: The survey link was clicked-through by 411 respondents, but only 379 respondents (92.2%) completed their responses. The proposed
model shows the strongest explanatory factor for actual dosimeter use; attitude (β=0.646, p<0.001). Meanwhile,
self-efficacy (β=0.221, p=0.014) and perceived usefulness (β=0.214, p<0.018) can explain the behaviour minimally.
The overall developed model explained 42.3% of the variance in the tested constructs (R2=0.423).
Conclusion: The findings suggest strategies to the authority regarding the successful radiation monitoring practice. Continuous education is vital to improve workers’ attitude and self-efficacy. Moreover, the authority should also upgrade the device to help workers adhere to the requirement.