Doctor-patient relationship in oncologic radiology

Patient-Centered Outcomes Related to Imaging Testing in US Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Imaging tests are one of the most sophisticated types of diagnostic tools used in health care, yet there are concerns that imaging is overused. Currently, tests are typically evaluated and implemented based on their accuracy, and there is limited knowledge about the range of patient-centered outcomes (PCOs) that imaging tests may lead to. This study explores patients' experiences and subsequent outcomes of imaging tests most notable to patients.

METHODS

Adult patients from four primary care clinics who had an x-ray, CT, MRI, or ultrasound in the 12 months before recruitment participated in a single semistructured interview to recount their imaging experience. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Four themes related to PCOs were identified from 45 interviews. Participants' mean age was 53 years (25-83 years), 30 had undergone a diagnostic imaging test, and 15 underwent imaging for screening or monitoring. Themes included knowledge gained from the imaging test, its contribution to their overall health care journey, physical experiences during the test procedure, and impacts of the testing process on emotions.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients identified various imaging test outcomes that were important to them. Measurement and reporting these outcomes should be considered more often in diagnostic research. Tools for providers and patients to discuss and utilize these outcomes may help promote shared decision making around the use and impact of imaging tests.

Multiprovider and Patient Perspectives on Conveying Diagnostic Imaging Investigation Results in a South African Public Health Care System

INTRODUCTION

This study explored interaction processes in conveying messages about the results of diagnostic imaging investigations in a public hospital complex in South Africa from the perspective of health care providers and patients.

METHODS

The study was part of a qualitative inquiry into the interaction and communication processes relating to diagnostic imaging investigations in the public health care system. Data collection included individual interviews with 24 patients and 62 health care providers (ie, medical practitioners, specialists, radiologists, registrars, radiographers, and nurses). In addition, 12 focus group interviews were conducted with health care providers. The transcribed data were coded and analysed to identify categories and themes.

RESULTS

Three main themes emerged from the study. The first theme deals with the medical territory, specifically who should interpret and convey the diagnostic results to the patient. The second theme highlights the role of radiographers and nurses in communicating parts of the diagnostic results. The last theme focuses on patient experience, interpretation, and comprehension in the provider-patient communication process.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide a multidimensional view about the disclosure of imaging results to patients by medical and nonmedical health care providers. Further research is needed on the role of nonmedical providers in the context of ethical and moral obligation toward patients and the professional restrictions inherent in their scope of practice.

Healthcare provider and patient perspectives on diagnostic imaging investigations

BACKGROUND

Much has been written about the patient-centred approach in doctor-patient consultations. Little is known about interactions and communication processes regarding healthcare providers' and patients' perspectives on expectations and experiences of diagnostic imaging investigations within the medical encounter. Patients journey through the health system from the point of referral to the imaging investigation itself and then to the post-imaging consultation. AIM AND SETTING: To explore healthcare provider and patient perspectives on interaction and communication processes during diagnostic imaging investigations as part of their clinical journey through a healthcare complex.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted, with two phases of data collection. Twenty-four patients were conveniently selected at a public district hospital complex and were followed throughout their journey in the hospital system, from admission to discharge. The second phase entailed focus group interviews conducted with providers in the district hospital and adjacent academic hospital (medical officers and family physicians, nurses, radiographers, radiology consultants and registrars).

RESULTS

Two main themes guided our analysis: (1) provider perspectives; and (2) patient dispositions and reactions. Golden threads that cut across these themes are interactions and communication processes in the context of expectations, experiences of the imaging investigations and the outcomes thereof.

CONCLUSION

Insights from this study provide a better understanding of the complexity of the processes and interactions between providers and patients during the imaging investigations conducted as part of their clinical pathway. The interactions and communication processes are provider-patient centred when a referral for a diagnostic imaging investigation is included.

Reviewing imaging examination results with a radiologist immediately after study completion: patient preferences and assessment of feasibility in an academic department

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess patient preferences about receiving radiology results and reviewing the images and findings directly with a radiologist after completion of an examination.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A prospective survey of English-speaking outpatients undergoing either nononcologic CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis or nonobstetric ultrasound examinations was completed between December 2010 and June 2011. Responses to survey items such as preferences regarding communication of results, knowledge of a radiologist, and anxiety level before and after radiologist-patient consultation were recorded. The average wait time between the end of the imaging examination and the consultation and the duration of consultation were documented.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients (43 men, 43 women; mean age, 52 years) underwent 37 CT and 49 ultrasound examinations). Forty-eight patients (56%) identified a radiologist as a physician who interprets images. Before imaging, 70 patients (81%) preferred hearing results from both the ordering provider and the radiologist. This percentage increased to 78 (91%) after consultation (p=0.03). Before consultation, 84 of the 86 patients (98%) indicated they would be comfortable hearing normal results or abnormal results from the person interpreting the examination; the number increased to 85 (99%) after consultation. Eighty-five patients (99%) agreed or strongly agreed that reviewing their examination findings with a radiologist was helpful. Eighty-four patients (98%) indicated they wanted the option of reviewing or always wanted to review future examination findings with a radiologist. After consultation, anxiety decreased in 41 patients (48%), increased in 13 (15%), and was unchanged in 32 (37%) (p=0.0001). The average wait for consultation and the duration of consultation were 9.9 and 10.4 minutes for CT and 1.2 and 7.1 minutes for ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

Patients prefer hearing examination results from both their ordering provider and the interpreting radiologist. Most patients find radiologist consultation beneficial. Patients are comfortable hearing results from the radiologist, with most displaying decreased anxiety after consultation.

Prevalence of anxiety in patients awaiting diagnostic procedures in an oncology center in Brazil

OBJECTIVE

Anxiety disorders have been shown to undermine the quality of life of cancer patients. Unfortunately, medical professionals often neglect to screen for anxiety in their patients. The aim of the present study was to describe the prevalence of anxiety in patients awaiting diagnostic procedures in an oncology center waiting room, and to investigate possible relationships between anxiety and demographic and clinical variables.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed with 398 patients who completed a self-administered questionnaire containing the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI).

RESULTS

Results of the HADS indicated that 38% of participants had anxiety, while data from the STAI showed that 46% had either high state or trait anxiety. The most frequently cited source of anxiety was concern over test results. Age, gender, employment status, and education level were correlated with anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of anxiety is high among patients awaiting diagnostic procedures. Patients in the waiting room should be routinely screened for anxiety. Careful assessment and treatment of anxiety are important components in the care of patients with cancer.

Patient experiences and preferences: development of practice guidelines in a cancer imaging department

Objective: To improve patient management based on analysis of the results of a survey conducted during their visit to the imaging department of a cancer centre. Materials and methods: A questionnaire comprising 30 single-response questions on a dichotomous scale or a 3- or 4-modality scale was developed by three radiologists specialized in oncology, the head of our quality assurance department, a psycho-oncologist, a psycho-sociologist, a biostatistician and a member of our institute's Patient Committee. Questions concerned reception, information provided about the examinations, examination experiences, the relational qualities and availability of health care professionals, the interview with the radiologist and announcement of the examination results. Results: The questionnaire was given to 190 patients in the waiting room before a standard radiography or ultrasound examination (33%), mammography and breast ultrasound (33%), computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (34%). The return rate was 81%. This article analyses the responses to the various questions in terms of either percentages or detailed replies and suggestions. Conclusion: Analysis of the patients’ experience and their suggestions provided objective elements concerning their real wishes in relation to each step of their management and identified changes and improvements to be made to the organization and daily functioning of the department.