Literature DB >> 18242529

Suboptimal awareness of radiologic dose among patients undergoing cardiac stress scintigraphy.

Gigliola Bedetti1, Carmine Pizzi, Gilberto Gavaruzzi, Federica Lugaresi, Alberto Cicognani, Eugenio Picano.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing radiologic and nuclear medicine examination often receive little, if any, information related to the radiologic dose and consequent potential long-term cancer risk. This "economical with the truth" communication may violate basic patients' rights. We assessed the information perceived by patients on the radiation dose exposure during nuclear medicine examinations.
METHODS: We recruited 109 consecutive patients (66 male; aged 66 +/- 10 years) who were referred to the Nuclear Medicine laboratory of Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital (Bologna University, Bologna, Italy) for a cardiac rest-stress technetium-99m sestamibi scan. This scan gives an effective dose of approximately 10 mSv, corresponding to a dose equivalent of 500 chest x-rays (European Commission Medical Imaging Guidelines 2001) and an estimated extra lifetime attributable risk of 1 cancer in 1,000 exposed subjects (Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII Committee 2005).
RESULTS: Radiation dose exposure was correctly identified by 21% of patients, with the remaining 79% underestimating the exposure by at least 500 times, considered to be zero by 11%, one-half of a chest x-ray by 23%, 1 chest x-ray by 35%, and "don't know" by 10%. The long-term cancer risk was correctly estimated by 27% of patients, with the remaining substantially underestimating the risk, considered to be "zero" by 30%, 1 in 1 million by 19%, 1 in 100,000 by 9%, and "don't know" by 10%.
CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing common cardiac stress scintigraphy examinations involving significant radiation exposure have little or no awareness about nuclear medicine dose (and corresponding risk). This ineffective communication poses significant ethical concerns and possible vulnerability to legal suits against practitioners and prescribers, especially in case of inappropriate examinations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18242529     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2007.07.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  7 in total

1.  "I don't know" my cancer risk: exploring deficits in cancer knowledge and information-seeking skills to explain an often-overlooked participant response.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hay; Heather Orom; Marc T Kiviniemi; Erika A Waters
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Justification of diagnostic medical exposures: some practical issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation.

Authors:  J Malone; R Guleria; C Craven; P Horton; H Järvinen; J Mayo; G O'reilly; E Picano; D Remedios; J Le Heron; M Rehani; O Holmberg; R Czarwinski
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Cumulative exposure to ionizing radiation from diagnostic and therapeutic cardiac imaging procedures: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Jersey Chen; Andrew J Einstein; Reza Fazel; Harlan M Krumholz; Yongfei Wang; Joseph S Ross; Henry H Ting; Nilay D Shah; Khurram Nasir; Brahmajee K Nallamothu
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-07-09       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Dosimetry of patients submitted to cerebral PET/CT for the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment.

Authors:  Priscila do Carmo Santana; Arnaldo Prata Mourão; Paulo Márcio Campos de Oliveira; Felipe Dias Bernardes; Marcelo Mamede; Teógenes Augusto da Silva
Journal:  Radiol Bras       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec

5.  Cumulative exposure to ionising radiation from diagnostic imaging tests: a 12-year follow-up population-based analysis in Spain.

Authors:  Blanca Lumbreras; Josee María Salinas; Isabel Gonzalez-Alvarez
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  The American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine:deep impact on the practice of cardiovascular imaging.

Authors:  Eugenio Picano; Eliseo Vano; Richard Semelka; Dieter Regulla
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2007-10-31       Impact factor: 2.062

7.  Radiological informed consent in cardiovascular imaging: towards the medico-legal perfect storm?

Authors:  Gigliola Bedetti; Cosimo Loré
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2007-10-04       Impact factor: 2.062

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.