Congress:
EuroSafe Imaging 2017
Keywords:
Economics, Socio-economic issues, Ethics, Cost-effectiveness, Plain radiographic studies, Mammography, CT, Radioprotection / Radiation dose, Professional issues, Management, Action 12 - Information for and communication with patients, Action 11 - Improved patient communication, Education and training
Authors:
J. Vilar Palop, B. Lumbreras, J. Vilar, I. González Álvarez, M. Guilabert, M. Pastor-Valero, L. A. Parker, I. Hernández-Aguado
DOI:
10.1594/esi2017/ESI-0026
Conclusion and Recommendations
This study highlights the lack of knowledge in the general population and the limited information received from the health professionals regarding the radiation exposure associated with five different diagnostic imaging tests.
Although more than 70% of the participants affirmed that they were aware of the risks associated with radiation exposure in imaging tests,
only 30% of them knew that CT or mammography involve radiation.
Moreover,
38% of the participants thought that MRI involves radiation.
In the qualitative study,
most of the participants stated that they did not know enough radiation exposure terms to understand the physicians’ explanation and some of them had misconceptions about radiation exposure that could alter their expectations of benefits versus risks.
Less than 20% of the interviewed population indicated that the physician informed them about the risks associated with imaging tests involving radiation.
Similarly,
in the qualitative evaluation,
the participants stated that they received little information regarding the radiological risks and they pointed out that they only received information about how they should prepare themselves for the test.
The survey pointed out that when participants received comprehensive information about radiation exposure from diagnostic imaging tests they appeared to be more likely to share the decision with the physician regarding whether to order the imaging test or not.
When participants were asked about the best written format to explain the risks related to radiation,
the equivalent number of chest X-ray procedures and the equivalent time exposed to background radiation were the preferred formats (Fig 5).
In conclusion,
this study highlights the lack of knowledge in the general population and the limited information delivered by the health professionals regarding the risks associated with radiation exposure from imaging tests.
Initiatives should be designed to reinforce patients’ awareness of radiation exposure and their role when ordering a diagnostic imaging test.
Some tools could help,
such as a table detailing the radiation equivalence in terms of x-rays,
of background radiation,
or of associated cancer risk,
or the availability of the patient’s radiation dose history.