What does the literature say about preceptorship and mentorship in radiography: A scoping review of the current research and identified knowledge gaps

Abstract

Objectives

Effective transition into radiography practice for newly qualified radiographers (NQR's), radiographers returning to practice after career breaks, and internationally trained radiographers requires support inclusive of preceptorship and mentorship. The purpose of this scoping review is to evaluate the literature pertaining to preceptorship and mentorship support in radiography to identify knowledge gaps. This is timely in view of the health and care professions council (HCPC) recently published preceptorship guidance.

Key Findings

A scoping review methodology underpinned by Arksey and O'Malley framework was undertaken, which employed a systematic search using combined keywords and Medical Subject Heading terms (MeSH) related to preceptorship and mentorship, of electronic databases: CINAHL, Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and Google scholar. A predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to screen by three independent reviewers, the titles, abstract and full text of articles using Covidence software (www.covidence.org). 10 articles in the English language were selected for the final review.

1574 articles were retrieved and assessed for eligibility, and 10 articles published between 2006 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the research was conducted in the United Kingdom and only one study was published in Australia. The studies mainly focused on experiences of NQR, and experienced radiographers' perspectives on preceptorship and mentorship in diagnostic and radiotherapy radiography. It was established from the studies that there is variation in approaches to the transition process in terms of types of programmes, duration, and quality. Self-reported increase in confidence and competence was noted as a central objective, and barriers to implementation were identified to include lack of awareness and accessibility to available programmes, lack of clarity on aims and intended benefits, and lack of employer support pertaining to protected time.

Conclusion

The paucity of research renders current preceptorship and mentorship practices in radiography inadequate for effective transition of different radiography groups into their role. Further research is required to evaluate the models of preceptorship and mentorship, their impact and intended outcomes on radiography practice.

Implications for practice

The identification of knowledge gaps in this area can support employers and researchers in the development of effective models of preceptorships and mentorship which can be evaluated for implementation for specific radiography groups.