This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Keywords:
Education and training, Health policy and practice, MR, CT-Angiography, Radioprotection / Radiation dose, eHealth
Authors:
L. Mostafavi1, J. Hollada2, W. Speier2, W. Marfori2, S. G. Ruehm2; 1Los Angeles, CA/US, 2Los Angeles/US
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2017/C-1572
Methods and materials
Over a six-month period,
210 patients referred for various types of cardiac imaging examinations, completed a survey investigating: a) if the risks and benefits of the exam were sufficiently explained; b) if they believed the benefits from their exam outweighed the risks of exposure to radiation; c) if their physician suggested that a cardiac imaging exam was capable of diagnosing a medical problem,
then it was worth the risk of being exposed to radiation; and d) whether they would be willing to undergo an imaging study with higher radiation exposure if the test results were more accurate (Fig.
1).
All patients were also asked to indicate,
on a scale from 0%-100%,
how likely they think it is that d) their test will correctly diagnose a potential health condition; e) their test will correctly diagnose a significant blockage of one or more of their coronary arteries; f) their test will correctly diagnose the absence of significant blockage of their coronary arteries.
In addition,
they were asked what they believed their likelihood was of having a significant blockage of one or more of their coronary arteries given their age,
demographics,
risk factors and symptoms (Fig.
2).