From research to clinical practice: a European neuroradiological survey on quantitative advanced MRI implementation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
Quantitative MRI (qMRI) methods provide versatile neuroradiological applications and are a hot topic in research. The degree of their clinical implementation is however barely known. This survey was created to illuminate which and how qMRI techniques are currently applied across Europe.Methods
In total, 4753 neuroradiologists from 27 countries received an online questionnaire. Demographic and professional data, experience with qMRI techniques in the brain and head and neck, usage, reasons for/against application, and knowledge of the QIBA and EIBALL initiatives were assessed.Results
Two hundred seventy-two responders in 23 countries used the following techniques clinically (mean values in %): DWI (82.0%, n = 223), DSC (67.3%, n = 183), MRS (64.3%, n = 175), DCE (43.4%, n = 118), BOLD-fMRI (42.6%, n = 116), ASL (37.5%, n = 102), fat quantification (25.0%, n = 68), T2 mapping (16.9%, n = 46), T1 mapping (15.1%, n = 41), PET-MRI (11.8%, n = 32), IVIM (5.5%, n = 15), APT-CEST (4.8%, n = 13), and DKI (3.3%, n = 9). The most frequent usage indications for any qMRI technique were tissue differentiation (82.4%, n = 224) and oncological monitoring (72.8%, n = 198). Usage differed between countries, e.g. ASL: Germany (n = 13/63; 20.6%) vs. France (n = 31/40; 77.5%). Neuroradiologists endorsed the use of qMRI because of an improved diagnostic accuracy (89.3%, n = 243), but 50.0% (n = 136) are in need of better technology, 34.9% (n = 95) wish for more communication, and 31.3% need help with result interpretation/generation (n = 85). QIBA and EIBALL were not well known (12.5%, n = 34, and 11.0%, n = 30).Conclusions
The clinical implementation of qMRI methods is highly variable. Beyond the aspect of readiness for clinical use, better availability of support and a wider dissemination of guidelines could catalyse a broader implementation.Key points
• Neuroradiologists endorse the use of qMRI techniques as they subjectively improve diagnostic accuracy. • Clinical implementation is highly variable between countries, techniques, and indications. • The use of advanced imaging could be promoted through an increase in technical support and training of both doctors and technicians.
SUBMITTER: Manfrini E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8270851 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAdvanced Access has been strongly promoted as a means of improving access to general practice. Key principles include measuring demand, matching capacity to demand, managing demand in different ways and having contingency plans. Although not advocated by Advanced Access, some practices have also restricted availability of pre-booked appointments.AimThis study compares the strategies used to improve access by practices which do or do not operate Advanced Access.Design of studyPostal survey of practices.SettingThree hundred and ninety-one practices in 12 primary care trusts.MethodQuestionnaires were posted to practice managers to collect data on practice characteristics, supply and demand of appointments, strategies employed to manage demand, and use of Advanced Access.ResultsTwo hundred and forty-five from 391 (63%) practices returned a questionnaire and 162/241(67%) claimed to be using Advanced Access. There were few differences between characteristics of practices operating Advanced Access or not. Both types of practice had introduced a wide range of measures to improve access. The proportion of doctors' appointments only available for booking on the same day was higher in Advanced Access practices (40 versus 16%, difference = 24%, 95% CI = 16% to 32%). Less than half the practices claiming to operate Advanced Access ((63/140; 45%) used all four of this model's key principles.ConclusionThe majority of practices in this sample claim to have introduced Advanced Access, but the degree of implementation is very variable. Advanced Access practices use more initiatives to measure and improve access than non-Advanced Access practices.
| S-EPMC1934051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical trials remain key to the development of evidence-based medical practice. However, they are becoming increasingly complex, mainly in a multinational setting. To address these challenges, the European Union (EU) adopted the Clinical Trial Regulation EU No. 536/2014 (CTR). Once in force, the CTR will lead to more consistent rules and simplification of procedures for conducting clinical trials throughout the EU. Existing harmonization initiatives and "research infrastructures" for clinical trials may facilitate this process. This publication offers a snapshot of the current level of harmonization activities in academic clinical research in Europe.MethodsA survey was performed among the member and observer countries of the European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), using a standardized questionnaire. Three rounds of data collection were performed to maximize completeness and comparability of the received answers. The survey aimed to describe the harmonization of academic clinical research processes at national level, to facilitate the exchange of expertise and experience among countries, and to identify new fields of action.ResultsMost scientific partners already have in place various working groups and harmonization activities at national level. Furthermore, they are involved in and open to sharing their know-how and documents. Since harmonization was mainly a bottom-up approach up until now, the extent and topics dealt with are diverse and there is only little cross-networking and cross-country exchange so far.ConclusionsCurrently, the ECRIN member countries offer a very solid base and collaborative spirit for further aligning processes and exchanging best practices for clinical research in Europe. They can support a smooth implementation of the EU CTR and may act as single contact with consolidated expertise in a country.
| S-EPMC8051345 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInvestigator-initiated clinical studies (IITs) are crucial to generate reliable evidence that answers questions of day-to-day clinical practice. Many challenges make IITs a complex endeavour, for example, IITs often need to be multinational in order to recruit a sufficient number of patients. Recent studies highlighted that well-trained study personnel are a major factor to conduct such complex IITs successfully. As of today, however, no overview of the European training activities, requirements and career options for clinical study personnel exists.MethodsTo fill this knowledge gap, a survey was performed in all 11 member and observer countries of the European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), using a standardised questionnaire. Three rounds of data collection were performed to maximize completeness and comparability of the received answers. The survey aimed to describe the landscape of academic training opportunities, to facilitate the exchange of expertise and experience among countries and to identify new fields of action.ResultsThe survey found that training for Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and investigator training is offered in all but one country. A specific training for study nurses or study coordinators is also either provided or planned in ten out of eleven countries. A majority of countries train in monitoring and clinical pharmacovigilance and offer specific training for principal investigators but only few countries also train operators of clinical research organisations (CRO) or provide training for methodology and quality management systems (QMS). Minimal requirements for study-specific functions cover GCP in ten countries. Only three countries issued no requirements or recommendations regarding the continuous training of study personnel. Yet, only four countries developed a national strategy for training in clinical research and the career options for clinical researchers are still limited in the majority of countries.ConclusionsThere is a substantial and impressive investment in training and education of clinical research in the individual ECRIN countries. But so far, a systematic approach for (top-down) strategic and overarching considerations and cross-network exchange is missing. Exchange of available curricula and sets of core competencies between countries could be a starting point for improving the situation.
| S-EPMC6821032 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe field of conduction system pacing (CSP) is evolving, and our aim was to obtain a contemporary picture of European CSP practice.Methods and resultsA survey was devised by a European CSP Expert Group and sent electronically to cardiologists utilizing CSP. A total of 284 physicians were invited to contribute of which 171 physicians (60.2%; 85% electrophysiologists) responded. Most (77%) had experience with both His-bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP). Pacing indications ranked highest for CSP were atrioventricular block (irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction) and when coronary sinus lead implantation failed. For patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and heart failure (HF), conventional biventricular pacing remained first-line treatment. For most indications, operators preferred LBBAP over HBP as a first-line approach. When HBP was attempted as an initial approach, reasons reported for transitioning to utilizing LBBAP were: (i) high threshold (reported as >2 V at 1 ms), (ii) failure to reverse bundle branch block, or (iii) > 30 min attempting to implant at His-bundle sites. Backup right ventricular lead use for HBP was low (median 20%) and predominated in pace-and-ablate scenarios. Twelve-lead electrocardiogram assessment was deemed highly important during follow-up. This, coupled with limitations from current capture management algorithms, limits remote monitoring for CSP patients.ConclusionsThis survey provides a snapshot of CSP implementation in Europe. Currently, CSP is predominantly used for bradycardia indications. For HF patients with LBBB, most operators reserve CSP for biventricular implant failures. Left bundle branch area pacing ostensibly has practical advantages over HBP and is therefore preferred by many operators. Practical limitations remain, and large randomized clinical trial data are currently lacking.
| S-EPMC10227660 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo perform a survey among all European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) radiologist members to gather representative data regarding the clinical use of breast DWI.MethodsAn online questionnaire was developed by two board-certified radiologists, reviewed by the EUSOBI board and committees, and finally distributed among EUSOBI active and associated (not based in Europe) radiologist members. The questionnaire included 20 questions pertaining to technical preferences (acquisition time, magnet strength, breast coils, number of b values), clinical indications, imaging evaluation, and reporting. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Chi-square test of independence, and Fisher's exact test.ResultsOf 1411 EUSOBI radiologist members, 275/1411 (19.5%) responded. Most (222/275, 81%) reported using DWI as part of their routine protocol. Common indications for DWI include lesion characterization (using an ADC threshold of 1.2-1.3 × 10-3 mm2/s) and prediction of response to chemotherapy. Members most commonly acquire two separate b values (114/217, 53%), with b value = 800 s/mm2 being the preferred value for appraisal among those acquiring more than two b values (71/171, 42%). Most did not use synthetic b values (169/217, 78%). While most mention hindered diffusion in the MRI report (161/213, 76%), only 142/217 (57%) report ADC values.ConclusionThe utilization of DWI in clinical practice among EUSOBI radiologists who responded to the survey is generally in line with international recommendations, with the main application being the differentiation of benign and malignant enhancing lesions, treatment response assessment, and prediction of response to chemotherapy. Report integration of qualitative and quantitative DWI data is not uniform.Key points• Clinical performance of breast DWI is in good agreement with the current recommendations of the EUSOBI International Breast DWI working group. • Breast DWI applications in clinical practice include the differentiation of benign and malignant enhancing, treatment response assessment, and prediction of response to chemotherapy. • Report integration of DWI results is not uniform.
| S-EPMC9064723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In clinical practice as well as in many volumetric studies we use different reorientations of the brain position towards x and y axis on the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. In order to find out whether it has an overall effect on the resulting 2D data, manual hippocampal area measurements and rotation variability of the brain (in two reoriented axes) and the skull were performed in 23 Alzheimer's disease patients and 31 healthy controls. After the MRI scanning, native brain scans (nat) were reoriented into the two different artificial planes (anterior commissure-posterior commissure axis (AC-PC) and hippocampal horizontal long axis (hipp)). Hippocampal area and temporal horn of the lateral ventricle was measured manually using freeware Image J program. We found that 1) hippocampal area of nat images is larger compared to hipp images, area of the nat images is equal to the AC-PC images and area of the hipp images is smaller compared to AC-PC images, 2) hippocampal area together with the area of the temporal horn for nat images is larger compared to hipp images, area of the hipp images is smaller compared to the AC-PC images and area of the nat images is smaller compared to the AC-PC images. The conclusion is that the measured area of the hippocampus in the native MRI is almost the same as the area of MRI reoriented only into the AC-PC axis. Therefore, when performing 2D area studies of the hippocampus or in the clinical practice we recommend usage of not-reoriented MRI images or to reorient them into the AC-PC axis. Surprising finding was that rotation of both AC-PC and hipp line towards x-axis among patients varies up to 35° and the same is true for the skull rotation so that it is not only a matter of the brain position.
| S-EPMC4264873 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsEight years ago, a paper-based survey was administered during the World Pharma 2010 meeting, asking about the challenges of implementing pharmacogenetics (PGx) in clinical practice. The data collected at the time gave an idea about the progress of this implementation and what still needs to be done. Since then, although there have been major initiatives to push PGx forward, PGx clinical implementation may still be facing different challenges in different parts of the world. Our aim was therefore to distribute a follow-up international survey in electronic format to elucidate an overview on the current stage of implementation, acceptance and challenges of PGx in academic institutions around the world.MethodsThis is an online anonymous LimeSurvey-based study launched on 11 November 2018. Survey questions were adapted from the initially published manuscript in 2010. An extensive web search for worldwide scientists potentially involved in PGx research resulted in a total of 1973 names. Countries were grouped based on the Human Development Index.ResultsThere were 204 respondents from 43 countries. Despite the wide availability of PGx tests, the consistently positive attitude towards their applications and advances in the field, progress of the clinical implementation of PGx still faces many challenges all around the globe.ConclusionsClinical implementation of PGx started over a decade ago but there is a gap in progress around the globe and discrepancies between the challenges reported by different countries, despite some challenges being universal. Further studies on ways to overcome these challenges are warranted.
| S-EPMC6710530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aims Indirect peroral cholangiopancreatoscopy (IPOC) is a relatively new diagnostic and therapeutic tool for biliopancreatic diseases. This international survey aimed to evaluate clinical practice patterns in IPOC among endoscopists in Europe. Methods An online survey was developed comprising 66 questions on the use of IPOC. Questions were grouped into four domains. The survey was sent to 369 endoscopists who perform IPOC. Results 86 respondents (23.3 %) from 21 different countries across Europe completed the survey. The main indications for cholangioscopy were determination of biliary strictures (85 [98.8 %]) and removal of common bile duct or intrahepatic duct stones (79 [91.9 %]), accounting for an estimated use of 40 % (interquartile range [IQR] 25-50) and 40 % (IQR 30-60), respectively, of all cases undergoing cholangioscopy. Pancreatoscopy was mainly used for removal of pancreatic duct stones (68/76 [89.5 %]), accounting for an estimated use of 76.5 % (IQR 50-95) of all cases undergoing pancreatoscopy. Only 13/85 respondents (15.3 %) had an institutional standardized protocol for targeted cholangioscopy-guided biopsy sampling. IPOC with lithotripsy was used as first-line treatment in selected patients with bile duct stones or pancreatic stones by 24/79 (30.4 %) and 53/68 (77.9 %) respondents, respectively. Conclusions This first European survey on the clinical practice of IPOC demonstrated wide variation in experience, indications, and techniques. These results emphasize the need for prospective studies and development of an international consensus guideline to standardize the practice and quality of IPOC.
| S-EPMC8589539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vestibular rehabilitation (VR) is practiced across Europe but little in this area has been quantified. The aim of this study was to investigate current VR assessment, treatment, education, and research practices. This was an online, cross-sectional survey with 39 VR specific questions and four sections: demographics, current practice, education, and research. The survey was disseminated through the Dizzynet network to individual therapists through country-specific VR special interest groups. Results were analysed descriptively. A thematic approach was taken to analyse open questions. A total of 471 individuals (median age 41, range 23 - 68 years, 73.4% women), predominately physiotherapists (89.4%) from 20 European countries responded to the survey. They had worked for a median of 4 years (range < 1 - 35) in VR. The majority (58.7%) worked in hospital in-patient or out-patient settings and 21.4% in dedicated VR services. Most respondents specialized in neurology, care of the elderly (geriatrics), or otorhinolaryngology. VR was reported as hard/very hard to access by 48%, with the main barriers to access identified as lack of knowledge of health care professionals (particularly family physicians), lack of trained therapists, and lack of local services. Most respondents reported to know and treat benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV 87.5%), unilateral vestibular hypofunction (75.6%), and cervicogenic dizziness (63%). The use of vestibular assessment equipment varied widely. Over 70% used high-density foam and objective gait speed testing. Over 50% used dynamic visual acuity equipment. Infrared systems, Frenzel lenses, and dynamic posturography were not commonly employed (< 20%). The most frequently used physical outcome measures were the Clinical Test of the Sensory Interaction of Balance, Functional Gait Assessment/Dynamic Gait Index, and Romberg/Tandem Romberg. The Dizziness Handicap Inventory, Visual Analogue Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale, and the Vertigo Symptom Scale were the most commonly used patient reported outcome measures. Adaptation, balance, and habituation exercises were most frequently used (> 80%), with virtual reality used by 15.6%. Over 70% reported knowledge/use of Semont, Epley and Barbeque-Roll manoeuvres for the treatment of BPPV. Most education regarding VR was obtained at post-registration level (89.5%) with only 19% reporting pre-registration education. There was strong (78%) agreement that therapists should have professionally accredited postgraduate certification in VR, with blended learning the most popular mode. Three major research questions were identified for priority: management of specific conditions, effectiveness of VR, and mechanisms/factors influencing vestibular compensation and VR. In summary, the survey quantified current clinical practice in VR across Europe. Knowledge and treatment of common vestibular diseases was high, but use of published subjective and objective outcome measures as well as vestibular assessment varied widely. The results stress the need of improving both training of therapists and standards of care. A European approach, taking advantage of best practices in some countries, seems a reasonable approach.
| S-EPMC7552585 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextTheories and frameworks (hereafter called models) enhance dissemination and implementation (D&I) research by making the spread of evidence-based interventions more likely. This work organizes and synthesizes these models by (1) developing an inventory of models used in D&I research; (2) synthesizing this information; and (3) providing guidance on how to select a model to inform study design and execution.Evidence acquisitionThis review began with commonly cited models and model developers and used snowball sampling to collect models developed in any year from journal articles, presentations, and books. All models were analyzed and categorized in 2011 based on three author-defined variables: construct flexibility, focus on dissemination and/or implementation activities (D/I), and the socioecologic framework (SEF) level. Five-point scales were used to rate construct flexibility from broad to operational and D/I activities from dissemination-focused to implementation-focused. All SEF levels (system, community, organization, and individual) applicable to a model were also extracted. Models that addressed policy activities were noted.Evidence synthesisSixty-one models were included in this review. Each of the five categories in the construct flexibility and D/I scales had at least four models. Models were distributed across all levels of the SEF; the fewest models (n=8) addressed policy activities. To assist researchers in selecting and utilizing a model throughout the research process, the authors present and explain examples of how models have been used.ConclusionsThese findings may enable researchers to better identify and select models to inform their D&I work.
| S-EPMC3592983 | biostudies-literature