What are the expectations of patients regarding the communication of nuclear imaging results? Insights from a French national survey of 723 patients.
AI interpretation is pending for this paper.
Open original publication →What the AI sees
Not AI summarized yet.
Research significance
Pending deeper interpretation.
Source abstract
OBJECTIVES: There are still some controversies regarding the role of nuclear medicine practitioners in delivering imaging findings to the patients as well as content and magnitude of information to be delivered. The aim of the study was to identify the expectations of patients regarding the communication of results from a nuclear imaging examination. DESIGN: A national survey was conducted among patients who underwent a nuclear imaging examination. In each participating centre, a questionnaire was administered to the patients. SETTING: Primary care in France. PARTICIPANTS: The study involved 723 patients from 12 French Nuclear Medicine departments (university hospitals, general hospitals, comprehensive cancer centres and private centres). OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary endpoint was to determine the proportion of patients expressing a wish to consult a nuclear medicine physician at the end of the imaging session and to assess the rationale underlying this preference. RESULTS: Our results indicate that a significant majority (73.2%) of patients prefer to meet primarily with the nuclear medicine physician to receive an explanation of the imaging findings. Concerning the disclosure of these results, 66.1% of the patients prefer to receive an explanation from the nuclear medicine physician, either alongside or instead of the requesting physician alone. Furthermore, nearly all patients (96.1%) who wish to meet with the nuclear medicine physician also indicate their willingness to receive the examination results, even if they are unfavourable. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the clear preference of patients to interact with nuclear medicine specialists and benefit from their expertise, irrespective of whether the results are positive or negative. This emphasises the critical need for implementing standardised recommendations across countries and ensuring adequate training for nuclear physicians to actually meet this demand. This aspect is likely to distinguish a nuclear medicine physician from a scan interpreter.