Exploring the workplace culture and leadership within PET CT departments across the United Kingdom

Introduction

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) uses a positron camera and Computed Tomography (CT) to locate radionuclide concentrations within a patient's body for various referral pathways, including oncology, cardiology, and neurology. The PET-CT imaging rollout across the United Kingdom (UK) is a mix of National Health Service and private provider sites, with a varied skills mix in the workforce. This study aims to explore the workplace culture and leadership within a private provider PET-CT departments across the UK to understand the current challenges.

Method

A n=39 question cross-sectional survey using purposive sampling of a single private provider of PET-CT sites across the UK (n=260) was conducted. The survey was divided into n=6 sections: demographics, teamwork, standards and processes, professional development, workload levels, and work environment questions. Data analysis applied descriptive statistics and thematic analysis for recurring themes and patterns.

Results

Twenty-five responses were received, providing a range of answers on what makes an effective team, from communication (64%), collective decision-making (28%), the efficiency of standardisation of protocols (68%), and adequate work environments (72%). Key barriers included variation of protocols across sites (64%), lack of work appraisals (28%), and time to complete mandatory training (48%), and daily tasks (60%).

Conclusion

Findings present opportunities to improve the culture and leadership by reviewing staffing levels, workforce planning, training and communication. Specifically, the dissemination of information between teams was identified as an area for future improvement.

Implications for practice

Improvements to communication, allocated time for training and career opportunities would assist staff retention and teamwork. Future research into the standardisation of PET-CT protocols would be beneficial.

1. Scarsbrook AF., Barrington SF. PET-CT in the UK: current status and future directions. Clin Radiol 2016;71(7):673–90. Doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2016.02.023.
2. NHS England. Diagnostic Imaging Dataset Annual Statistical Release 2023/24 .v1, London; 2024.
3. NHS England. Engagement Report for Positron Emission Tomography - Computed Tomography (PET CT) Scanning (All Ages) No.2266, London; 2024.
4. Royal College of Radiologists., Royal College of Physicians., British Nuclear Medicine Society., Administration of Radioactive Substances Advisory Committee. Evidence based indications for the use of PET-CT in the United Kingdom, London; 2022.
5. Cook GJR., Dickson J., Chicklore S., Dempsey M., Ferreira A., MacKewn J., et al. BNMS UK PET standards. Nucl Med Commun 2024;45(1):1–15.
6. Husband J., Gordon I., Ebdon-Jackson S., Miles KA., Cook G., Dubbins P. PET-CT in the UK: a strategy for development and integration of a leading edge technology within routine clinical practice 2005.
7. Meadows A., Allie R. The growth and progression of PET-CT n.d.
8. NHS England. Cancer Registration Statistics, London; 2022.
9. Dickson J., Eve J. IPEM survey of the current status of PET/CT imaging. Scope (Kalamazoo) 2016;25:10–5.
10. Department of Health. A Framework for the Development of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Services in England, London; 2005.
11. Currie GM., Hawk KE., Rohren EM. Challenges confronting sustainability in nuclear medicine practice. Radiography 2024;30:1–8.
12. Azzolini E., Ricciardi W., Gray M. Healthcare organizational performance: why changing the culture really matters. Ann Ist Super Sanita 2018;54(1):6–8. Doi: 10.4415/ANN_18_01_03.
13. Chau M. Enhancing safety culture in radiology: Key practices and recommendations for sustainable excellence. Radiography 2024;30:9–16. Doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.04.025.
14. Välimäki M., Hu S., Lantta T., Hipp K., Varpula J., Chen J., et al. The impact of evidence-based nursing leadership in healthcare settings: a mixed methods systematic review. BMC Nurs 2024;23(1):452. Doi: 10.1186/s12912-024-02096-4.
15. Milojević S., Aleksić VS., Slavković M. “Direct Me or Leave Me”: The Effect of Leadership Style on Stress and Self-Efficacy of Healthcare Professionals. Behavioral Sciences 2024;15(1):25. Doi: 10.3390/bs15010025.
16. Aslan M., Sönmez S., Deniz M. Leadership styles and work stress: the role of workplace climate and feelings of entrapment. Current Psychology 2025. Doi: 10.1007/s12144-025-07656-8.
17. Ahmed AK., Atta MHR., El-Monshed AH., Mohamed AI. The effect of toxic leadership on workplace deviance: the mediating effect of emotional exhaustion, and the moderating effect of organizational cynicism. BMC Nurs 2024;23(1):669. Doi: 10.1186/s12912-024-02308-x.
18. Alsadaan N., Salameh B., Reshia FAAE., Alruwaili RF., Alruwaili M., Awad Ali SA., et al. Impact of Nurse Leaders Behaviors on Nursing Staff Performance: A Systematic Review of Literature. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing 2023;60. Doi: 10.1177/00469580231178528.
19. Lexa FJ., Parikh JR. Leadership: Causing and Curing Burnout in Radiology. Journal of the American College of Radiology 2023;20(5):500–2. Doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2023.03.002.
20. Mannion R., Davies H. Understanding organisational culture for healthcare quality improvement. Bmj 2018;363. Doi: 10.1136/bmj.k4907.
21. Corazzini K., Twersky J., White HK., Buhr GT., McConnell ES., Weiner M., et al. Implementing culture change in nursing homes: An adaptive leadership framework. Gerontologist 2015;55(4):616–27. Doi: 10.1093/geront/gnt170.
22. Microsoft IT Corporation. Forms 2024.
23. International Business Machines Corporation (IBM). SPSS Statistics (V.29.0.0.0(241) 2020.
24. Clarke V., Braun V. Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners 2013.
25. Microsoft IT Corporation. Excel 2024.
26. QSR International. NVivo 2018.
27. Said R. The Role Of Organizational Culture In Shaping Communication Practices. Journal of Organizational Culture Communications and Conflict 2024;28(4):1–3.
28. Buljac-Samardzic M., Doekhie KD., van Wijngaarden JDH. Interventions to improve team effectiveness within health care: a systematic review of the past decade. Hum Resour Health 2020;18(1):2. Doi: 10.1186/s12960-019-0411-3.
29. Seidman G., Pascal L., McDonough J. What benefits do healthcare organisations receive from leadership and management development programmes? A systematic review of the evidence. BMJ Leader 2020;4(1):21. Doi: 10.1136/leader-2019-000141.
30. Gesme DH., Towle EL., Wiseman M. Essentials of Staff Development and Why You Should Care. J Oncol Pract 2010;6(2):104–6. Doi: 10.1200/JOP.091089.
31. Thom SE. Does advanced practice in radiography benefit the healthcare system? A literature review. Radiography 2018. Doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2017.08.002.
32. Society of Radiographers. Current and Future Roles of Diagnostic Radiographers, London; 2021.
33. Health and Care Professions Council. Standards of Proficiency for Radiographers, London; 2023.
34. Society of Radiographers. Nuclear Medicine Practice, London; 2005.
35. The Register of Clinical Technologists. Continuing professional development (CPD). Continuing Professional Development (CPD). Available from: https://therct.org.uk/information-for-registrants/continuing-profess... [accessed March 19, 2025].
36. The British Nuclear Medicine Society. Revalidation. Revalidation. Available from: https://www.bnms.org.uk/page/Revalidation [accessed March 19, 2025].
37. NHS England. Training, development and registration (nuclear medicine). Health Careers NHS. Available from: https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/healthcare-science/ro... [accessed March 19, 2025].
38. Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine. Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Policy. Policies and Procedures Manual Volume 01 Section 13, London; 2019.
39. Holbrook DS. Need for PET/CT National Licensure. J Nucl Med Technol 2007;35(1):2.
40. Perkins AC., Gordon I., Read J., Ellis B. Training of staff for the delivery of PET/CT services in the UK. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27(12):1005–10.
41. The Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine. Nuclear Medicine Workforce Survey Report 2023, London; 2023.
42. Toscas FS., Nascimento MAC. Challenges in the incorporation of high complexity technologies: PET-CT study in the perspective of radiotherapy expansion plan. Revista Medica de Minas Gerais (Online) 2020;30.
43. Manzana LC., Chipeya LR., Bresser P. Experiences of nuclear medicine technologists working in PET/CT facilities in Gauteng Province, South Africa. J Nucl Med Technol 2024;52(2):163–7.
44. Hyde E., Hardy M. Patient centred care in diagnostic radiography (Part 1): Perceptions of service users and service deliverers. Radiography 2021;27(1):8–13. Doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2020.04.015.
45. Hyde E., Hardy M. Patient centred care in diagnostic radiography (Part 2): A qualitative study of the perceptions of service users and service deliverers. Radiography 2021;27(2):322–31. Doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2020.09.008.
46. Bailey S., West M. Naming the issue: Chronic excessive workload in the NHS. The King’s Fund 2021.
47. Verrier W., Harvey J. An investigation into work related stressors on diagnostic radiographers in a local district hospital. Radiography 2010;16(2):115–24. Doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2009.09.005.
48. Society and College of Radiographers., Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine., Royal College of Radiologists. Learning from ionising radiation dose errors, adverse events and near misses in UK clinical imaging departments Working party user guidance., London; 2019.
49. Royal College of Radiologists. Standards for radiology events and learning meetings . BFCO(20)1, London; 2020.
50. Elliott J., Hodges C., Boots M., Pattinson R., Gillen E., Whybrow D., et al. Mixed shift rotations, sleep, burnout and well-being in professions similar to radiographers: A systematic review. Radiography 2024;30(4):1194–200. Doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.05.016.
51. Alenezi A., Soliman K. Trends in radiation protection of positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging. Ann ICRP 2015;44(1_suppl):259–79. Doi: 10.1177/01466453145516.
52. Nguyen TTH., Phung HT., Bui ATM. Applying the workload indicators of staffing needs method in nursing health workforce planning: evidences from four hospitals in Vietnam. Hum Resour Health 2022;19(Suppl 1):124. Doi: 10.1186/s12960-021-00668-y.
53. Briatte I., Allix-Béguec C., Garnier G., Michel M. Revision of hospital work organization using nurse and healthcare assistant workload indicators as decision aid tools. BMC Health Serv Res 2019;19:1–9. Doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4376-7.
54. Gallach M., Lette MM., Abdel-Wahab M., Giammarile F., Pellet O., Paez D. Addressing global inequities in positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) for cancer management: a statistical model to guide strategic planning. Med Sci Monit 2020;26:e926544-1.
55. Verduzco-Aguirre HC., Lopes G., Soto-Perez-De-Celis E. Implementation of diagnostic resources for cancer in developing countries: a focus on PET/CT. Ecancermedicalscience 2019;13.
56. Society of Radiographers. Implementing Radiography Career Progression: Guidance for Managers, London; 2005.
57. Thompson AMN., Henwood SM. From the clinical to the managerial domain: the lived experience of role transition from radiographer to radiology manager in South‐East Queensland. J Med Radiat Sci 2016;63(2):89–95. Doi: 10.1002/jmrs.169.
58. West M., Armit K., Loewenthal L., Eckert R., West T., Lee A. Leadership and leadership development in health care: the evidence base 2015.
59. Ogbonnaya C., Babalola MT. A closer look at how managerial support can help improve patient experience: Insights from the UK’s National Health Service. Human Relations 2021;74(11):1820–40. Doi: 10.1177/0018726720938.
60. Jones B., Horton T., Home J. Strengthening NHS management and leadership: Priorities for reform. The Health Foundation 2022.
61. Parand A., Dopson S., Renz A., Vincent C. The role of hospital managers in quality and patient safety: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2014;4(9):e005055. Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005055.