Britt-Marie Ahlander1, Jan Engvall2,3, Eva Maret4, Elisabeth Ericsson5. 1. Department of Radiology, Ryhov County Hospital, Jönköping, Sweden. 2. Department of Clinical Physiology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 3. Center of Medical Image Science and Visualization, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 4. Department of Clinical Physiology, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health Science, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of video information given before cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging on patient anxiety and to compare patient experiences of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging versus myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. To evaluate whether additional information has an impact on motion artefacts. BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy are technically advanced methods for the evaluation of heart diseases. Although cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging is considered to be painless, patients may experience anxiety due to the closed environment. DESIGN: A prospective randomised intervention study, not registered. METHODS: The sample (n = 148) consisted of 97 patients referred for cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, randomised to receive either video information in addition to standard text-information (CMR-video/n = 49) or standard text-information alone (CMR-standard/n = 48). A third group undergoing myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (n = 51) was compared with the cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging-standard group. Anxiety was evaluated before, immediately after the procedure and 1 week later. Five questionnaires were used: Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale, MRI Fear Survey Schedule and the MRI-Anxiety Questionnaire. Motion artefacts were evaluated by three observers, blinded to the information given. Data were collected between April 2015-April 2016. The study followed the CONSORT guidelines. RESULT: The CMR-video group scored lower (better) than the cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging-standard group in the factor Relaxation (p = .039) but not in the factor Anxiety. Anxiety levels were lower during scintigraphic examinations compared to the CMR-standard group (p < .001). No difference was found regarding motion artefacts between CMR-video and CMR-standard. CONCLUSION: Patient ability to relax during cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging increased by adding video information prior the exam, which is important in relation to perceived quality in nursing. No effect was seen on motion artefacts. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Video information prior to examinations can be an easy and time effective method to help patients cooperate in imaging procedures.
RCT Entities:
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of video information given before cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging on patientanxiety and to compare patient experiences of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging versus myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. To evaluate whether additional information has an impact on motion artefacts. BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy are technically advanced methods for the evaluation of heart diseases. Although cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging is considered to be painless, patients may experience anxiety due to the closed environment. DESIGN: A prospective randomised intervention study, not registered. METHODS: The sample (n = 148) consisted of 97 patients referred for cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, randomised to receive either video information in addition to standard text-information (CMR-video/n = 49) or standard text-information alone (CMR-standard/n = 48). A third group undergoing myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (n = 51) was compared with the cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging-standard group. Anxiety was evaluated before, immediately after the procedure and 1 week later. Five questionnaires were used: Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale, MRI Fear Survey Schedule and the MRI-Anxiety Questionnaire. Motion artefacts were evaluated by three observers, blinded to the information given. Data were collected between April 2015-April 2016. The study followed the CONSORT guidelines. RESULT: The CMR-video group scored lower (better) than the cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging-standard group in the factor Relaxation (p = .039) but not in the factor Anxiety. Anxiety levels were lower during scintigraphic examinations compared to the CMR-standard group (p < .001). No difference was found regarding motion artefacts between CMR-video and CMR-standard. CONCLUSION:Patient ability to relax during cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging increased by adding video information prior the exam, which is important in relation to perceived quality in nursing. No effect was seen on motion artefacts. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Video information prior to examinations can be an easy and time effective method to help patients cooperate in imaging procedures.
Keywords:
cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging; myocardial perfusion scintigraphy; nursing; patient experience; patient information; video information
Authors: Ana Monteiro Grilo; Ana Catarina Ferreira; Marta Pedro Ramos; Elisabete Carolino; Ana Filipa Pires; Lina Vieira Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2022-07-05
Authors: Mikkel Fode; Alexander B Nolsøe; Frederik M Jacobsen; Giorgio Ivan Russo; Peter B Østergren; Christian Fuglesang S Jensen; Maarten Albersen; Paolo Capogrosso; Jens Sønksen Journal: Sex Med Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 2.491
Authors: Rosha Babapour Mofrad; Agnetha D Fruijtier; Leonie N C Visser; Nina Hoogland; Maisa van Dijk; Frederique van Rossum; Femke H Bouwman; Ellen M A Smets; Charlotte E Teunissen; Wiesje M van der Flier Journal: Alzheimers Dement (N Y) Date: 2021-02-14