Literature DB >> 31347397

Patient Knowledge Regarding Radiation Exposure From Foot and Ankle Imaging.

Blaine T Manning1, Daniel D Bohl2, Alexander J P Idarraga2, George B Holmes2, Simon Lee2, Johnny L Lin2, Kamran S Hamid2.   

Abstract

Foot and ankle surgeons routinely prescribe diagnostic imaging that exposes patients to potentially harmful ionizing radiation. It is unclear how well patients understand the radiation to which they are exposed. In this study, 946 consecutive new patients were surveyed regarding medical imaging and radiation exposure prior to their first appointment. Respondents compared the amount of radiation associated with chest X-rays (CXRs) with various types of foot and ankle imaging. Results were compared with actual values of radiation exposure from the published literature. Of 946 patients surveyed, 841 (88.9%) participated. Most had private insurance (82.8%) and a bachelor's degree or higher (60.6%). Most believed that foot X-ray, ankle X-ray, "low dose" foot and ankle computed tomography (CT) scan (alluding to cone-beam CT), and traditional foot and ankle CT scan contain similar amounts of ionizing radiation to CXR. This contradicts the published literature that suggests that the actual exposure to patients is 0.006, 0.006, 0.127, and 0.833 CXR equivalents of radiation, respectively. Of patients who had undergone an X-ray, 55.9% thought about the issue of radiation prior to the study, whereas 46.1% of those undergoing a CT scan considered radiation prior to the exam. Similarly, 35.2% and 27.6% reported their doctor having discussed radiation with them prior to obtaining an X-ray and CT scan, respectively. Patients greatly overestimate the radiation exposure associated with plain film X-rays and cone-beam CT scans of the foot and ankle, and may benefit from increased counseling regarding the relatively low radiation exposure associated with these imaging modalities. Level of Evidence: Level III: Prospective questionnaire.

Entities:  

Keywords:  foot and ankle imaging; patient education; radiation

Year:  2019        PMID: 31347397     DOI: 10.1177/1938640019865364

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot Ankle Spec        ISSN: 1938-6400


  2 in total

1.  Non-weightbearing compared with weightbearing x-rays in hallux valgus decision-making.

Authors:  Andrzej Boszczyk; Sławomir Kwapisz; Maciej Kiciński; Bartłomiej Kordasiewicz; Henryk Liszka
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Virtual fracture clinic reduces patient X-ray volume for common wrist and ankle fractures.

Authors:  Conor S O'Driscoll; Andrew J Hughes; Fergus J McCabe; Elaine Hughes; John F Quinlan; Brendan J O'Daly
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2021-10-16       Impact factor: 2.089

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.