Giuseppe Lo Re1, Rossella De Luca2, Filippa Muscarneri1, Patrizia Dorangricchia1, Dario Picone3, Federica Vernuccio1, Sergio Salerno1, Giuseppe La Tona1, Antonio Pinto4, Massimo Midiri1, Antonio Russo2, Roberto Lagalla1, Giuseppe Cicero2. 1. Section of Radiology-Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Policlinico Paolo Giaccone, Via del Vespro 129, 90127, Palermo, Italy. 2. Dipartimento di discipline chirurgiche Oncologiche e stomatologiche, DICHIRONS, University of Palermo, Policlinico Paolo Giaccone, Via Liborio Giuffrè 5, 90127, Palermo, Italy. 3. Section of Radiology-Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Policlinico Paolo Giaccone, Via del Vespro 129, 90127, Palermo, Italy. dariopicone@hotmail.it. 4. Unità operative a Struttura Complessa di Radiologia Generale e di Pronto Soccorso, A.O.R.N. "A. Cardarelli", Naples, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Every patient could feel anxious when he waits in a radiological department to undergo diagnostic exams. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of the radiological exams on patient anxiety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated 343 patients (mean age 54.83 years) who underwent different types of diagnostic exams in the Department of Diagnostic Imaging at our Hospital from April 2013 to August 2014. We administered to patients the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory Test, which detected with high sensitivity both state anxiety and trait anxiety. A team of clinical psychologists and radiologists evaluated the scores obtained. RESULTS: 83 out of 343 patients were excluded because refused to file the questionnaire. 31 % of the patients were submitted to MR, 18 % to breast imaging, 10 % to X-ray, 22 % Computer Tomography and 19 % to ultrasound, as previously described. 41 % of patients were submitted to the examination because of an oncologic disease, while 59 % because of non-oncological disease. Therefore, it was found that high levels of anxiety were present in most (about 91 %) of the patients and the scores varied according to the imaging examination and to the examination's reason: anxiety level was higher in non-oncological patients (54 %) and in patients waiting to undergo to MRI exams (29 %). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the diagnostic exams are stressful events for the patient, also in non-oncological patients. So, it is important to adequate the radiological staff to receive the patient, to inform him and perform exams with emotive involvement with a targeted education. Also, further studies are needed to evaluate the anxiety level and the quality of the images, because the anxiety can result in a somatic disorder with hyperactivity of the autonomic nervous system which may affect the patient's physical examination, causing problems in the evaluation of radiological images making to non-cooperative patient. MRI imaging is the examination that more of all led to an anxious state of patients but the main stressor is not related to the type of diagnostic examination, but to the uncertainty of the diagnosis, therapy and prognosis.
OBJECTIVE: Every patient could feel anxious when he waits in a radiological department to undergo diagnostic exams. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of the radiological exams on patientanxiety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated 343 patients (mean age 54.83 years) who underwent different types of diagnostic exams in the Department of Diagnostic Imaging at our Hospital from April 2013 to August 2014. We administered to patients the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory Test, which detected with high sensitivity both state anxiety and trait anxiety. A team of clinical psychologists and radiologists evaluated the scores obtained. RESULTS: 83 out of 343 patients were excluded because refused to file the questionnaire. 31 % of the patients were submitted to MR, 18 % to breast imaging, 10 % to X-ray, 22 % Computer Tomography and 19 % to ultrasound, as previously described. 41 % of patients were submitted to the examination because of an oncologic disease, while 59 % because of non-oncological disease. Therefore, it was found that high levels of anxiety were present in most (about 91 %) of the patients and the scores varied according to the imaging examination and to the examination's reason: anxiety level was higher in non-oncological patients (54 %) and in patients waiting to undergo to MRI exams (29 %). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the diagnostic exams are stressful events for the patient, also in non-oncological patients. So, it is important to adequate the radiological staff to receive the patient, to inform him and perform exams with emotive involvement with a targeted education. Also, further studies are needed to evaluate the anxiety level and the quality of the images, because the anxiety can result in a somatic disorder with hyperactivity of the autonomic nervous system which may affect the patient's physical examination, causing problems in the evaluation of radiological images making to non-cooperative patient. MRI imaging is the examination that more of all led to an anxious state of patients but the main stressor is not related to the type of diagnostic examination, but to the uncertainty of the diagnosis, therapy and prognosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Anxiety; Diagnostic imaging; Oncology; Quality of life; STAI; Social support
Authors: Britt-Marie Ahlander; Kristofer Årestedt; Jan Engvall; Eva Maret; Elisabeth Ericsson Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Michael M Lell; Hendrik Ditt; Christoph Panknin; James W Sayre; Ernst Klotz; Stefan G Ruehm; J Pablo Villablanca Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Ludovico La Grutta; Sabina La Grutta; Massimo Galia; Giuseppe Lo Piccolo; Giovanni Gentile; Giuseppe La Tona; Maria Stella Epifanio; Erica Maffei; Filippo Cademartiri; Rosa Lo Baido; Roberto Lagalla; Massimo Midiri Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Andreas Gutzeit; Regine Heiland; Sonja Sudarski; Johannes M Froehlich; Klaus Hergan; Matthias Meissnitzer; Sebastian Kos; Peter Bertke; Orpheus Kolokythas; Dow M Koh Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: G Lo Re; F Vernuccio; M L Di Vittorio; L Scopelliti; A Di Piazza; M C Terranova; D Picone; C Tudisca; S Salerno Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2019-03-25 Impact factor: 2.124
Authors: Andreas Gutzeit; Arne Fischmann; Rosemarie Forstner; Romana Goette; Bernhard Herzog; Claudia Kurtz; Chantal Hebler; Andrea Ladinger; Johannes M Froehlich; Janusch Blautzik; Orpheus Kolokythas; Simon Matoori; Sebastian Kos; Carolin Reischauer; Hubert Schefer; Peter Dubsky; Simon Peter Gampenrieder; Klaus Hergan; Wolfgang Gaissmaier; Dow-Mu Koh; Matthias Meissnitzer Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 3.909
Authors: Selina Largiader; Andreas Gutzeit; Elisabeth Sartoretti; Thomas Sartoretti; Dow Mu Koh; Sabine Sartoretti-Schefer; Sebastian Kos; Romana Goette; Ricardo Donners; Robyn Benz; Johannes M Froehlich; Simon Matoori; Peter Dubsky; Tino Plümecke; Rosemarie Forstner; Willibald Ruch; Matthias Meissnitzer; Klaus Hergan Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2022-10-08 Impact factor: 5.605