License versus Non-License States

Anthony Todd Dotson*

License versus Non-License States.

After introducing the new standard for patient and workplace safety regarding ionizing
radiation, particularly in CT, the Joint Commission is hopeful to mitigate the risk at hand and
bring a standard across the board regarding licensure.

The reasoning behind the push from accrediting agencies and professional organizations is to ensure and
promote patient safety by requiring technologists be educated so that they are subject matter experts. To sit for the board exam technologists are required to study topics including patient care, radiation
safety, image production, and imaging procedures.

According to a survey by the ASRT, technologists who are not certified are more likely than their peers to rely on managers and other technologists to keep them informed on the latest advancements.

The lack of current information concerns, in that their peers may fail to inform them of advancements, or could even spread misinformation. Conversely, technologists that are certified are much more likely to cite reputable sources such
as professional journals and workshops, and continuing education credits, as their way of staying up-to-date.

There are also economic reasons that technologists would want to make sure licensure is required to their field. The simple principle of supply and demand dictates that if licensure is required, then the supply of qualified technologists is decreased and the demand will increase. This will cause an increase in compensation to the limited number of qualified technologists.

The reasoning behind non-licensure is that the cost of technologists will decrease for the healthcare organization because they do not have the qualifications that licensure requires. This is less expense for the organization.

Radiol Open J. 2017; 2(2): e4-e5. doi: 10.17140/ROJ-2-e005