Informed Decision Making Trumps Informed Consent for Medical Imaging with Ionizing Radiation

Brink, James A.; Goske, Marilyn J.; Patti, John A.

doi:10.1148/radiol.11111421

Cited by 59 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though it appears physicians and patients do not connect over the specifics of radiation exposure risk, there is a strong foundation for a trusting conversation about the topic. Informed decision-making [27][28][29][30] is an ideal model for discussion of CT radiation risk; offering a patient the opportunity to agree to a diagnostic plan creates a space in which radiation exposure can be discussed and simultaneously accounts for the variable nature of the patient-physician relationship.…”

Section: Communication Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to Computed Tomography Radiation Risk Communication in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Physician Perspectives

Robey

Edwards

Murphy

2014

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This qualitative study aimed to characterize the barriers to informed discussions between patients and emergency physicians (EPs) about radiation risk from computed tomography (CT) and to identify future interventions to improve patient understanding of CT radiation risk.Methods: This study used a focus group approach to collect concepts about radiation risk exposure from a national sample of EPs and a local sample of emergency department (ED) patients. A directed content analysis used an a priori medical ethics framework to explore themes from the focus groups while a subsequent normative ethics analysis compared these results with existing perceptions about discussing CT radiation risk.Results: Focus groups (three each for a total of 19 EPs and 27 patients) identified concepts consistent with core medical ethics principles: patients emphasized autonomy and nonmaleficence more than physicians, while physicians emphasized beneficence. Subjects' knowledge of radiation dose and risk were equivalent to previously published reports. When asked about whether they should talk about radiation with patients, 74% of EPs reported that radiation exposure should be discussed, but the study EPs self-reported doing so with only an average of 24% of patients. Patients reported wanting to hear about radiation from their physicians the next time they need CT scans and thought that a written handout would work better than any other method. When presented with options for how to discuss risk with patients, EPs reported needing easy access to risk information and preferred discussion over other communications approaches, but had mixed support of distributing patient handouts. Conclusions:The normative view that radiation from diagnostic CT should be discussed in the ED is shared by patients and physicians, but is challenged by the lack of a structured method to communicate CT radiation risk to ED patients. Our analysis identifies promising interest among physicians and patients to use information guides and electronic order prompts as potential informational tools to overcome this barrier.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2014; 21:122-129

show abstract

Section: Communication Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to Computed Tomography Radiation Risk Communication in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Physician Perspectives

Robey

Edwards

Murphy

2014

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…40,41 Certainly, there are currently no standards for informed consent for noninvasive cardiac imaging procedures that use ionizing radiation, and informed consent for these procedures is not obtained routinely. Furthermore, the legal standards for informed consent and how it is documented vary by US state.…”

Section: Shared Decision Making and Informed Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches to Enhancing Radiation Safety in Cardiovascular Imaging

Fazel¹,

Gerber²,

Balter³

et al. 2014

Circulation

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…37 Other concerns include workflow issues-informing every patient about the cancer risk would require staffing that most radiology practices are not equipped to handle.…”

Section: Communicating With the Patient: How To Communicate And Infomentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating radiation risk to patients and referring physicians in the emergency department setting

Shyu¹,

Sodickson²

2016

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heightened awareness about the radiation risks associated with CT imaging has increased patients' wishes to be informed of these risks, and has motivated efforts to reduce radiation dose and eliminate unnecessary imaging. However, many ordering providers, including emergency physicians, are ill prepared to have an informed discussion with patients about the cancer risks related to medical imaging. Radiologists, who generally have greater training in radiation biology and the risks of radiation, often do not have a face-to-face relationship with the patients who are being imaged. A collaborative approach between emergency physicians and radiologists is suggested to help explain these risks to patients who may have concerns about getting medical imaging.

show abstract

Informed Decision Making Trumps Informed Consent for Medical Imaging with Ionizing Radiation

Cited by 59 publications

References 15 publications

Barriers to Computed Tomography Radiation Risk Communication in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Physician Perspectives

Barriers to Computed Tomography Radiation Risk Communication in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Physician Perspectives

Approaches to Enhancing Radiation Safety in Cardiovascular Imaging

Communicating radiation risk to patients and referring physicians in the emergency department setting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About