C A Binkert1, M Zanetti, J Hodler. 1. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Balgrist, Zurich, Switzerland. binkert@compuserve.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess patient discomfort during (a) intraarticular contrast material injection (arthrography) and (b) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients referred for MR arthrography of the shoulder and to compare the relative discomfort associated with each part of the examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With use of a visual analogue scale (VAS) and relative ratings, 202 consecutive patients referred for MR arthrography of the shoulder rated the expected discomfort and that actually experienced during both arthrography and MR imaging. The Student t test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The average VAS score (0 = "did not feel anything," 100 = "unbearable") was 16.1 +/- 16.4 (SD) for arthrography and 20.2 +/- 25.0 for MR imaging. This difference was statistically significant (P =.036, paired t test). The discomfort experienced during arthrography was as expected in 90 (44.6%) patients, less than expected in 110 (54.4%), and worse than expected in two (1.0%). MR imaging-related discomfort was as expected in 114 (56.4%) patients, less than expected in 66 (32.7%), and worse in 22 (10.9%). Arthrography was rated worse than MR imaging by 53 (26.2%) patients, equal to MR imaging by 69 (34.2%), and less uncomfortable than MR imaging by 80 (39.6%). CONCLUSION: Arthrography-related discomfort was well tolerated, often less severe than anticipated, and rated less severe than MR imaging-related discomfort.
PURPOSE: To assess patient discomfort during (a) intraarticular contrast material injection (arthrography) and (b) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients referred for MR arthrography of the shoulder and to compare the relative discomfort associated with each part of the examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With use of a visual analogue scale (VAS) and relative ratings, 202 consecutive patients referred for MR arthrography of the shoulder rated the expected discomfort and that actually experienced during both arthrography and MR imaging. The Student t test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The average VAS score (0 = "did not feel anything," 100 = "unbearable") was 16.1 +/- 16.4 (SD) for arthrography and 20.2 +/- 25.0 for MR imaging. This difference was statistically significant (P =.036, paired t test). The discomfort experienced during arthrography was as expected in 90 (44.6%) patients, less than expected in 110 (54.4%), and worse than expected in two (1.0%). MR imaging-related discomfort was as expected in 114 (56.4%) patients, less than expected in 66 (32.7%), and worse in 22 (10.9%). Arthrography was rated worse than MR imaging by 53 (26.2%) patients, equal to MR imaging by 69 (34.2%), and less uncomfortable than MR imaging by 80 (39.6%). CONCLUSION: Arthrography-related discomfort was well tolerated, often less severe than anticipated, and rated less severe than MR imaging-related discomfort.
Authors: Sylvain R Duc; Juerg Hodler; Marius R Schmid; Marco Zanetti; Bernard Mengiardi; Claudio Dora; Christian W A Pfirrmann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-08-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Benjamin Fritz; Filippo Del Grande; Reto Sutter; Silvan Beeler; Cynthia K Peterson; Christian W A Pfirrmann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-06-17 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Matthieu J C M Rutten; James M P Collins; Bas J Maresch; Jacques H J M Smeets; Caroline M M Janssen; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; Gerrit J Jager Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-10-29 Impact factor: 5.315