Aim: This study aimed to develop an Attitude Scale on Radiation Emergency Medicine （ASREM） for Japanese nurses and to evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods: The original ASREM was developed based on interview data and a comprehensive review of the literature. A revised 35-item version was developed by examining the content validity of the original scale. Subsequently, we investigated the reliability and validity of the scale in 798 nurses employed at 31 primary, secondary, and tertiary medical institutions providing radiation treatment in Japan. Results: Valid responses were received from 376 nurses. After selecting items based on response bias, we conducted exploratory factor analysis using principal factor analysis with promax rotation. The following four factors comprising 25 items were finally extracted: 14 items, “confidence in knowledge and skills”; 6 items, “psychological resistance”; 3 items, “responsibility as a medical professional”; and 2 items “interest in radiation emergency medicine.” The reliability of the scale was confirmed by a Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient of 0.93 （0.69–0.72 for subscales; the correlation coefficient for the fourth factor was 0.52）. Criterion-related validity was confirmed by intervention using the resistance score related to nurses’ fears of contamination from patients with radiation exposure. Construct validity was confirmed using consent to participate in the radiation exposure medical care team. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted, and a hypothesized statistical model was found to fit the actual data. Conclusion: The present ASREM was determined to be appropriate for Japanese nurses and to have satisfactory reliability and validity.

Pharyngeal cancer is often accompanied by serious functional disorders due to patients’ anatomical characteristics. Nonetheless, most pharyngeal cancer patients undergo radiotherapy with good treatment results. However, their reactions to adverse event are commonly seen in the treatment process, and the resulting pain that occurs is extremely uncomfortable for them. This study investigated the outbreak situation of the adverse events （radiation dermatitis, dysphagia, throat） of 37 pharyngeal cancer patients （35 men, 2 women） who received radiotherapy. It also looked at their changes in radiation dermatitis using CTCAEv4.0 and the use time of the steroid ointment that helped treat their symptoms. The adverse events mentioned above appeared in most cases. For radiation dermatitis, the progression of the disease severity of the adverse event varied among individuals, but a similar tendency was seen in outbreak time and progress. In addition, there was the use time of the steroid ointment for the symptom in the range of 25.2Gy–63.0Gy （median; 45.0Gy） with a total dose of radioactivity. We think that the evaluation of the adverse event using a periodical patient interview was effective in grasping individual correspondence and the degree of the adverse event. For future studies, it is suggested that patient interviews and a review of the rating system will help effectively evaluate the adverse events of patient undergoing radiotherapy.

Purpose: This study aimed to clarify the time and degree of acute radiation syndrome caused by heavy ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer, the state of quality of life （QOL）, and factors influencing QOL. Methods: Participants comprised 42 prostate cancer patients who had been hospitalized and treated using heavy particle beam therapy. We asked the patients to record their symptoms using a symptom diary. The patients’ QOL was clarified using the SF-8^TM. The patients’ medical records were used for investigating the process of treatment. Results: Frequent symptoms were frequent urination, difficulty urinating, fatigue, dermatitis, and itchiness. Frequent urination occurred in 76％, and 66％ were classified as Grade 1. Dysuria occurred in 60％, fatigue in 31％, itchiness in 19％, and dermatitis in 21％. Coefficients of correlation for symptom scores during irradiation showed mild to moderate negative associations with PF, GH, RE, MH of QOL score at 4–6 weeks after completing radiotherapy. Cases with hormone therapy displayed slight negative correlations with GH and MH, whereas cases without hormone therapy showed a strong negative correlation with PF. Conclusion: Heavy ion radiotherapy was associated with significant increases in frequent urination and difficulty urinating, as seen for general radiotherapy and post-5th irradiation. QOL tended to decrease with irradiation and appearance of physical symptoms, regardless of the presence or absence of hormone therapy.

The aim of this study was to clarify the impression people have of a hazmat suit worn when technicians measure the amount of radiation contamination in a human body and when medical personnel treat patients with radiation exposure. Participants were 106 female nursing students and 59 female nurses. The questionnaire method was used to evaluate their impression of a hazmat suit. Participants were shown a photograph of a technician wearing a hazmat suit, goggles, and mask, and they reported their impression of the clothes. The Multiple Affective States scale was used to evaluate the impressions. Participants were also shown a photograph of a person wearing clothes commonly worn by medical personnel for comparison. The positive affective score was significantly higher for the clothes commonly worn by medical personnel for both nursing students and nurses. Nursing students had stronger “cheerful” and “fulfilled” impressions than nurses. The negative affective score was significantly higher for the hazmat suit for both nursing students and nurses, with no significant difference between the groups. Both groups’ strongest impression was “tense.” Because people’s impression of a hazmat suit required for radiation protection creates serious tension, an improvement in the appearance of the hazmat suit is necessary to reduce tension and anxiety in those who see people wearing this suit.

A questionnaire survey was conducted to learn the opinions of radiologists and radiological technologists about the expected roles and expertise of radiology nurse specialists （RNSs, a tentative name for new nurse specialists envisioned in Japan）. Thirty-five radiologists and 181 radiological technologists in one prefecture completed the questionnaire （the overall return rate was 63.9％）. The respondents indicated that nurses who have high levels of knowledge and expertise in radiology nursing are necessary to augment collaborative practice in radiology departments. Their suggestions included: 1） subspecialties should be sought by RNSs because the scope of radiology is becoming increasingly wider; 2） the relationship with other nursing specialties should be made clear; and 3） appropriate curriculum for RNSs should be developed. It was indicated that radiologists and radiological technologists expected RNSs to play an important role both in diagnostic radiology and radiation oncology.