Dataset Information

Patient understanding of diagnostic ultrasound examinations in an Australian private radiology clinic.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine patient understanding and expectations of ultrasound imaging and its safety, sources of examination information and levels of examination anxiety.

Methods

1070 consecutive patients presenting to a private, regional radiology practice in New South Wales, Australia between 16^th May and 14^th June 2019, were invited to complete a survey while waiting for their non-interventional ultrasound examination. The survey included questions on demographic characteristics, knowledge such as examination risks and safety, ultrasound expectations such as dissemination of results, sources of examination information and levels of participant anxiety. Data were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis tests (SPSS v. 25) to determine statistical associations between participant demographic factors, knowledge, anxiety level and the main source of examination information.

Results

A total of 215/1070 (20%) patients voluntarily participated in the study. Most were female (74%, 159/215), with a median (range) age of 55 (18-92) years. Participant's median (range) score of ultrasound imaging knowledge was 3 (0-5) scored out of six and indicated uncertainty regarding the ultrasound procedure, result dissemination and ultrasound safety. Participants with previous personal experience had significantly higher levels of ultrasound imaging knowledge than those whose primary information source was their referring doctor (P = 0.0005) or the internet (P = 0.026). Significantly higher levels of ultrasound examination knowledge were also associated with lower self-reported levels of anxiety (P = 0.002).

Conclusion

Participants had incomplete ultrasound examination knowledge, including misconceptions regarding safety and result dissemination, some of which could be clarified by the sonographer at the beginning of the ultrasound examination.

SUBMITTER: Starcevich A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8412012 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe ability for patients to directly view their radiology images through secure electronic portals is rare in the American health care system. We previously surveyed patients within our health system and found that a large majority wanted to view their own radiology images online, and we have since implemented this new feature.ObjectiveWe aim to understand patient experiences, opinions, and actions taken after viewing their own radiology images online.MethodsWe emailed a web-based survey to patients who recently viewed their radiology images via our electronic patient portal.ResultsWe sent 1825 surveys to patients and received 299 responses (response rate 16.4%). Patients reported a favorable experience (258/299, 86.3% agree) viewing their radiology images online. Patients found value in reading their radiology reports (288/299, 96.3% agree) and viewing their images (267/299, 89.3% agree). Overall, patients felt that accessing and viewing their radiology images online increased their understanding of their medical condition (258/299, 82.9%), made them feel more in control and reassured (237/299, 79.2% and 220/299, 73.6%, respectively), and increased levels of trust (214/299, 71.6%). Only 6.4% (19/299) of the patients indicated concerns with finding errors, 6.4% (19/299) felt that viewing their images online made them worry more, and 7% (21/299) felt confused when viewing their images online. Of patients who viewed their images online, 45.2% (135/299) took no action with their images, 32.8% (98/299) saved a copy for their records, 25.4% (76/299) shared them with their doctor, and 14.7% (44/299) shared them with another doctor for a second opinion. A total of 9 patients (3%) shared their radiology images on Facebook, Instagram, or both, primarily to inform family and friends. Approximately 10.4% (31/299) of the patients had questions about their radiology images after viewing them online, with the majority (20/31, 65%) seeking out a doctor, and far fewer (5/31, 16%) choosing to ask a family member about their images. Finally, respondents viewed their images online using 1 or more devices, including computers, smartphones, tablets, or a combination of these devices. Approximately 26.7% (103/385) of the responses noted technical difficulties, with the highest incidence rate occurring with smartphones.ConclusionsWe report the first known survey results from patients who viewed their own radiology images through a web-based portal. Patients reported high levels of satisfaction and increased levels of trust, autonomy, reassurance, and medical understanding. Only a small minority of patients expressed anxiety or confusion. We suggest that patient access to radiology images, such as patient access to radiology reports, is highly desired by patients and is operationally practical. Other health care institutions should consider offering patients access to their radiology images online in the pursuit of information transparency.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the effects of an intervention to alter patient unpunctuality. The major hypothesis was that the intervention will change the distribution of patient unpunctuality by decreasing patient tardiness and increasing patient earliness.DesignProspective Quality Improvement.SettingSpecialty Pain Clinic in suburban Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ParticipantsThe patient population ranged in age from 18 to 93?years. All patients presenting to the clinic during the study period were included in the study. The average monthly volume was 86.2 (SD=13) patients. A total of 1500 patient visits were included in this study.InterventionsWe tracked appointment times and patient arrival times at an ambulatory pain clinic. An intervention was made in which patients were informed that tardy patients would not be seen and would be rescheduled. This policy was enforced over a 12-month period.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe distribution of patient unpunctuality was developed preintervention and at 12?months after implementation. Distribution parameters were used as inputs to a discrete event simulation to determine effects of the change in patient unpunctuality on clinic delay.ResultsData regarding patient unpunctuality were gathered by direct observation before and after implementation of the intervention. The mean unpunctuality changed from -20.5?min (110 observations, SD=1.7) preintervention to -23.2 (169, 1.2) at 1?month after the intervention, -23.8?min (69, 1.8) at 6?months and -25.0?min (71, 1.2) after 1?year. The unpunctuality 12?months after initiation of the intervention was significantly different from that prior to the intervention (p<0.05).ConclusionsPhysicians and staff are able to alter patient arrival patterns to reduce patient unpunctuality. Reducing tardiness improves some measures of clinic performance, but may not always improve waiting times. Accommodating early arriving patients does serve to improve clinic performance.

Project description:BackgroundClinical and patient-reported outcomes are positively affected when efforts to increase patient understanding of underlying diseases and foster patient participation are part of care pathways. The prevalence of liver diseases is increasing globally, and successful communication of results from liver diagnostic tests will be important for physicians to ensure patient engagement and encourage adherence to lifestyle changes and therapy. Here, we aimed to explore the impact of non-invasive liver tests on patient experience and patient comprehension of liver disease in chronic liver disease diagnostic pathways typically managed with liver biopsies.Results101 participants diagnosed with a range of liver disease aetiologies (90 patients, 11 caregivers) underwent a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) test. A subset of 33 participants was subjected to transient elastography (TE) with FibroScan® in addition to multiparametric MRI. MRI results were analysed using LiverMultiScan™. Participants received results on their liver-health status followed by a semi-structured interview to assess the scan procedure experience, comprehension of the results, and experiences of liver disease. A subset of participants (N = 5) was also engaged in the design, execution, and thematic analysis of the interview transcripts of the study. Analysis of semi-structured interviews revealed: (1) Presentation and discussion of the LiverMultiScan visual report by a physician was an effective contributor to better patient experience and increased comprehension of liver disease. (2) Patients demonstrated preference for non-invasive tests over biopsy for management of liver disease. (3) Patients reported positive experiences with the MRI test during the path for liver disease management.ConclusionsPatients presented with visual reports of liver test results developed increased understanding of liver disease care which may have contributed to an overall more positive experience. Patients reported that clinical information obtained through non-invasive methods and transmitted through visual reports contributed to clarity, understanding and overall increased satisfaction. We conclude that a shift toward non-invasive testing and visual reporting of clinical information (e.g. picture of liver with visual scale) when possible are likely to contribute to improved physician engagement with patients and lead to better outcomes in the management of chronic liver diseases. Evidence suggests that patient experience and understanding can affect several aspects of clinical care and patient well-being. In this study, 101 patients and patient caregivers affected by liver diseases were recruited to determine how patient experiences of liver disease were affected with the introduction of non-invasive evaluation of the liver with an MRI or ultrasound-based elastography. All 101 participants received an MRI followed by a LiverMultiScan report. 33 participants received an additional FibroScan and report. Following the reports, participants were interviewed and asked to reflect on factors which affected their experience of the procedure and the understanding of their results. We focused on factors related to the layout of the standardised report and the delivery of its results. The interviews were transcribed and analysed for common themes and patterns. Patients and patient advocacy groups were involved in the design and conduct of the study, and analysis of the interview transcripts. Here, we report the perception of patients and patient caregivers on the quality of care and diagnostic experience. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier-NCT02877602.