Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

French

Purpose

To explore the patient perception on radiation-related cancer risk from interventional radiology (IR) procedures and whether informed radiation consent is warranted.

Methods

A multiple-choice survey was prospectively administered to 68 adults undergoing a body or neuro-IR procedure with ionizing radiation exposure. Subgroup analysis with chi-square or Fisher exact test was performed based on patient past IR history (P < .05).

Results

A total of 81% of patients wanted to be informed if there was a radiation-related 3% increased cancer risk over 5 years. Although 55% considered 3% a small risk, 28% wanted to further discuss the risks and alternate options, and 15% would have only proceeded if it were a life-saving procedure: 89%, 80%, and 67% of patients wanted to be informed with exposure risks of 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, and 1 in 10,000, respectively. Only 53% were aware they were going to be exposed to radiation, irrespective of past IR history (P = .15). Most patients believed radiation consent should include radiation-related cancer risks (85%). No past IR history was significantly associated with wanting consent to include cancer-related risk (100% vs 76%; P = .01) and deterministic risks (70% vs 41%; P = .04). A majority (69%) believed both the referring physician and the interventional radiologist were responsible for obtaining radiation consent, and 65% of patients wanted verbal consent followed by signed written consent, regardless of past IR history.

Conclusions

Many patients want to discuss cancer-related radiation risks with both radiologists and physicians. Informed radiation consent should be considered for procedures with high anticipated radiation doses.

Keywords

Informed consent Interventional radiology Patient-centred care Radiation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brenner

D.J.

Hall

E.J.

Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure

N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2277–2284.

Lee

Haims

Monico

Brink

J.A.

Forman

H.P.

Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks

Radiology 2004; 231:393–398.

Ricketts

M.L.

Baerlocher

M.O.

Asch

M.R.

Myers

Perception of radiation exposure and risk among patients, medical students, and referring physicians at a tertiary care community hospital

Can Assoc Radiol J 2013; 64:208–212.

Hendee

W.R.

O'Connor

M.K.

Radiation risks of medical imaging: separating fact from fantasy

Radiology 2012; 264:312–321.

Semelka

R.C.

Armao

D.M.

Elias

Jr. Picano

The information imperative: is it time for an informed consent process explaining the risks of medical radiation?

Radiology 2012; 262:15–18.

Malone

Guleria

Craven

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

Br J Radiol 2012; 85:523–538.

National Research Council

Executive summary Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation – BEIR VII

2005

National Academies Press

Washington, DC

Hendee

W.R.

Becker

G.J.

Borgstede

J.P.

Addressing overutilization in medical imaging

Radiology 2010; 257:240–245.

Steele

J.R.

Jones

A.K.

Clarke

R.K.

Giordano

S.H.

Shoemaker

Oncology patient perceptions of the use of ionizing radiation in diagnostic imaging

J Am Coll Radiol 2016; 13:768–774.

10.

Thornton

R.H.

Dauer

L.T.

Shuk

Patient perspectives and preferences for communication of medical imaging risks in a cancer care setting

Radiology 2015; 275:545–552.

11.

Uphoff

E.P.

Wennekes

Punt

C.J.

Development of generic quality indicators for patient-centered cancer care by using a RAND modified Delphi method

Cancer Nurs 2012; 35:29–37.

12.

Eisenberg

M.J.

Afilalo

Lawler

P.R.

Abrahamowicz

Richard

Pilote

Cancer risk related to low-dose ionizing radiation from cardiac imaging in patients after acute myocardial infarction

CMAJ 2011; 183:430–436.

13.

Dawes

P.J.

Davison

Informed consent: what do patients want to know?

J R Soc Med 1994; 87:149–152.

14.

Barnett

G.C.

Charman

S.C.

Sizer

Murray

P.A.

Information to be given to patients about adverse effects of radiotherapy: a survey of patients' views

Clin Oncol 2004; 16:479–484.

15.

Losanoff

J.E.

Litwinczuk

K.M.

Ranella

M.J.

Basson

M.D.

Elective inguinal hernia repair: a unified informed consent, or who wants to know what?

Am Surg 2009; 75:296–300.

16.

Busey

J.M.

Soine

L.A.

Yager

J.R.

Choi

Shuman

W.P.

Patient knowledge and understanding of radiation from diagnostic imaging

JAMA Intern Med 2013; 173:239–241.

17.

Reuter

S.R.

An overview of informed consent for radiologists

AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987; 148:219–227.

18.

Mavroforou

Giannoukas

Mavrophoros

Michalodimitrakis

Physicians' liability in interventional radiology and endovascular therapy

Eur J Radiol 2003; 46:240–243.

19.

O'Dwyer

H.M.

Lyon

S.M.

Fotheringham

Lee

M.J.

Informed consent for interventional radiology procedures: a survey detailing current European practice

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2003; 26:428–433.

20.

Phatouros

C.C.

Blake

M.P.

How much to tell? Patients' attitudes to an information sheet prior to angiography and angioplasty

Australas Radiol 1995; 39:135–139.

21.

Ripley

B.A.

Tiffany

Lehmann

L.S.

Silverman

S.G.

Improving the informed consent conversation: a standardized checklist that is patient centered, quality driven, and legally sound

J Vasc Interv Radiol 2015; 26:1639–1646.

22.

Brenner

D.J.

Hricak

Radiation exposure from medical imaging: time to regulate?

JAMA 2010; 304:208–209.

23.

Stecker

M.S.

Balter

Towbin

R.B.

CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee

Guidelines for patient radiation dose management

J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20:S263–S273.

24.

Brant-Zawadzki

Diagnostic radiology: major weapon in patient care or weapon of mass destruction?

J Am Coll Radiol 2005; 2:301–303.

25.

Janssen

N.B.A.T.

Oort

F.J.

Fockens

Willems

D.L.

de Haes

H.C.J.M.

Smets

E.M.A.

Under what conditions do patients want to be informed about their risk of a complication? A vignette study

J Med Ethics 2009; 35:276–282.

26.

Howlader

M.H.

Dhanji

A.R.

Uppal

Magee

Wood

A.J.

Anyanwu

A.C.

Patients' views of the consent process for adult cardiac surgery: questionnaire survey

Scand Cardiovasc J 2004; 38:363–368.

27.

Degerliyurt

Gunsolley

J.C.

Laskin

D.M.

Informed consent: what do patients really want to know?

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68:1849–1852.

28.

Farnill

Patients' desire for information about anaesthesia: Australian attitudes

Anaesthesia 1993; 48:162–164.

29.

Elder

M.J.

Suter

What patients want to know before they have cataract surgery

Br J Ophthalmol 2004; 88:331–332.

30.

Puri

Quazi

R.R.

Voci

Veazie

Block

Physicians' and midlevel providers' awareness of lifetime radiation-attributable cancer risk associated with commonly performed CT studies: relationship to practice behavior

AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199:1328–1336.

31.

Keijzers

G.B.

Britton

C.J.

Doctors' knowledge of patient radiation exposure from diagnostic imaging requested in the emergency department

Med J Aust 2010; 193:450–453.

32.

Ditkofsky

Shekhani

H.N.

Cloutier

Chen

Z.N.

Zhang

Hanna

T.N.

Ionizing radiation knowledge among emergency department providers

J Am Coll Radiol 2016; 13:1044–1049.

33.

Thomas

K.E.

Parnell-Parmley

J.E.

Haidar

Assessment of radiation dose awareness among pediatricians

Pediatr Radiol 2006; 36:823–832.

34.

Coakley

F.V.

Gould

Yeh

Arenson

R.L.

CT radiation dose: what can you do right now in your practice?

AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196:619–625.

35.

Larson

D.B.

Rader

S.B.

Forman

H.P.

Fenton

L.Z.

Informing patients about CT radiation exposure in children: it's OK to tell them

AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189:271–275.

Informed Consent for Radiation in Interventional Radiology Procedures

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References