Patient Centered Radiology – An Introduction in Form of a Narrative Review

Abstract

Background Patient centered radiology represents a crucial aspect for modern sustainable radiology. The definition of patient-centered consists of a focus on patients’ individual values and wishes with a respectful integration in medical decisions. In this narrative review we try to give a practical introduction into this complex topic with the extension to a person-centered radiology, which additionally encompasses values and wishes of radiological and other medical colleagues.

Methods Medline search between 2010 and 2021 using “patient-centered radiology” with additional subjective selection of articles for this narrative review.

Results Regarding patients’ experiences the main literature focus were patients’ fears of examinations (movement restrictions, uncertainty). Most patients would prefer a direct communication with the radiologist after the examination. Regarding interdisciplinary communication the radiological expertise and quality is highly appreciated; however, there was a general wish for more structured- or itemized reporting. Concerning working conditions radiologists were satisfied despite high psychosocial working pressure.

Conclusion Most of the literature on this topic consists of surveys evaluating the current state. Studies on interventions such as improved information before examinations or patient-readable reports are still scarce. There is a dilemma between an increasing radiological workload and the simultaneous wish for more patient-centered approaches such as direct radiologist-patient communications in the daily routine. Still on our way to a more value-based radiology we have to focus on patient communications and a patient-centered medicine.

Key Points:

• Patient centered radiology has a focus on the integration of patients’ individual values and wishes in their decisions.

• Radiologists are clinicians, who an additional diagnostic and therapeutic surplus for patients and referring physicians.

• The recent literature on this topic consists basically on the evaluation of the current status.

• Most patients prefer a direct communication with the radiologist.

• To gain a “value based” radiology we to focus on an optimized communication with patients and referring physicians.

Citation Format

• Schreyer AG, Schneider K, Dendl LM et al. Patient Centered Radiology – An Introduction in Form of a Narrative Review. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 873 – 881

Key words

health policy and practice - socioeconomic issues - narrative review - patient centered radiology

Publication History

Received: 27 September 2021

Accepted: 03 January 2022

Article published online:
23 February 2022

• Literatur

• 1 Bardes CL. Defining “patient-centered medicine”. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 782-783 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1200070.
• 2 [Anonym]. In Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington (DC): 2001 DOI: 10.17226/10027
• 3 Blodt S, Muller-Nordhorn J, Seifert G. et al. Trust, medical expertise and humaneness: A qualitative study on people with cancer' satisfaction with medical care. Health Expect 2021; 24: 317-326 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13171.
• 4 Sacristan JA. Patient-centered medicine and patient-oriented research: improving health outcomes for individual patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013; 13: 6 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-6.
• 5 King A, Hoppe RB. “Best practice” for patient-centered communication: a narrative review. J Grad Med Educ 2013; 5: 385-393 DOI: 10.4300/JGME-D-13-00072.1.
• 6 European Society of R. Value-based radiology: what is the ESR doing, and what should we do in the future?. Insights Imaging 2021; 12: 108 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-021-01056-9.
• 7 Carlowitz HC. Sylvicultura oeconomica. Anweisung zur wilden Baum-Zucht. Reprint der 2. Auflage. Braun, Leipzig 1732, Kessel, Remagen; 2012: 1732
• 8 Kajikawa Y, Tacoa K, Yamaguchi K. Sustainability science: the changing landscape of sustainability research. Sustain Sci 2014; 9: 431-438 DOI: 10.1007/s11625-014-0244-x.
• 9 Dillard J, Dujon V, King MC. Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustainability. Routledge; 2009
• 10 Flemming DJ, Gunderman RB. Should We Think of Radiologists as Nonclinicians?. J Am Coll Radiol 2016; 13: 875-877 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.02.026.
• 11 Dalla Palma L, Stacul F, Meduri S. et al. Relationships between radiologists and clinicians: results from three surveys. Clin Radiol 2000; 55: 602-605 DOI: 10.1053/crad.2000.0495.
• 12 Bosmans JM, Weyler JJ, De Schepper AM. et al. The radiology report as seen by radiologists and referring clinicians: results of the COVER and ROVER surveys. Radiology 2011; 259: 184-195 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10101045.
• 13 Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB. Engaging and educating patients in prostate imaging via social media. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016; 41: 798 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-0748-1.
• 14 Kadom N, Nagy P, Hawkins CM. The Role of Social Media in Quality Improvement. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 14: 577-578 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.08.019.
• 15 Rohrl S, Dendl LM, Scharf G. et al. Informed Consent in Contrast-Enhanced CT: Understanding of Risks and Identification of Possible Prognostic Factors. Rofo 2015; 187: 973-979 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-104212.
• 16 Hoffstetter P, Hammer S, Rohrl S. et al. [As time goes by – is it worth intensifying patient care during the waiting period for radiological examinations?]. Rofo 2012; 184: 1043-1048 DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1313049.
• 17 Munn Z, Jordan Z. The patient experience of high technology medical imaging: a systematic review of the qualitative evidence. JBI Libr Syst Rev 2011; 9: 631-678 DOI: 10.11124/01938924-201109190-00001.
• 18 Lo Re G, De Luca R, Muscarneri F. et al. Relationship between anxiety level and radiological investigation. Comparison among different diagnostic imaging exams in a prospective single-center study. Radiol Med 2016; 121: 763-768 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-016-0664-z.
• 19 Carlsson S, Carlsson E. 'The situation and the uncertainty about the coming result scared me but interaction with the radiographers helped me through': a qualitative study on patients' experiences of magnetic resonance imaging examinations. J Clin Nurs 2013; 22: 3225-3234 DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12416.
• 20 Smith JN, Gunderman RB. Should we inform patients of radiology results?. Radiology 2010; 255: 317-321 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10091608.
• 21 Itri JN. Patient-centered Radiology. Radiographics 2015; 35: 1835-1846 DOI: 10.1148/rg.2015150110.
• 22 Kaucher S, Khil L, Kajuter H. et al. Breast cancer incidence and mammography screening among resettlers in Germany. BMC Public Health 2020; 20: 417 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-08534-7.
• 23 Latulippe K, Hamel C, Giroux D. Social Health Inequalities and eHealth: A Literature Review With Qualitative Synthesis of Theoretical and Empirical Studies. J Med Internet Res 2017; 19: e136 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6731.
• 24 Kemp JL, Mahoney MC, Mathews VP. et al. Patient-centered Radiology: Where Are We, Where Do We Want to Be, and How Do We Get There?. Radiology 2017; 285: 601-608 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017162056.
• 25 Berlin L. Communicating results of all radiologic examinations directly to patients: has the time come?. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 1275-1282 DOI: 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.07.2740.
• 26 Berlin L. Communicating results of all outpatient radiologic examinations directly to patients: the time has come. Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192: 571-573 DOI: 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.08.1954.
• 27 Sprunt WH. Letters to the Editor: Whom Do We Serve?. 1966; 87: 1125 DOI: 10.1148/87.6.1125c.
• 28 Ragavendra N, Laifer-Narin SL, Melany ML. et al. Disclosure of results of sonographic examinations to patients by sonologists. Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170: 1423-1425 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.170.6.9609147.
• 29 Schreiber MH, Leonard Jr M, Rieniets CY. Disclosure of imaging findings to patients directly by radiologists: survey of patients' preferences. Am J Roentgenol 1995; 165: 467-469 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.165.2.7618577.
• 30 Lorch H, Scherer P. [Disclosure of diagnosis in ambulatory radiology practice: expectations of patients and referring physicians]. Rofo 2007; 179: 1043-1047 DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-963194.
• 31 Mangano MD, Rahman A, Choy G. et al. Radiologists' role in the communication of imaging examination results to patients: perceptions and preferences of patients. Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203: 1034-1039 DOI: 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.14.12470.
• 32 Gutzeit A, Heiland R, Sudarski S. et al. Direct communication between radiologists and patients following imaging examinations. Should radiologists rethink their patient care?. Eur Radiol 2019; 29: 224-231 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5503-2.
• 33 Vitzthum von Eckstaedt H, Kitts AB, Swanson C. et al. Patient-centered Radiology Reporting for Lung Cancer Screening. J Thorac Imaging 2020; 35: 85-90 DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000469.
• 34 Kwee RM, Kwee TC. Communication and empathy skills: Essential requisites for patient-centered radiology care. Eur J Radiol 2021; 140: 109754 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109754.
• 35 European Society of R. Patient survey of value in relation to radiology: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) value-based radiology subcommittee. Insights Imaging 2021; 12: 6 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-020-00943-x.
• 36 Mityul MI, Gilcrease-Garcia B, Mangano MD. et al. Radiology Reporting: Current Practices and an Introduction to Patient-Centered Opportunities for Improvement. Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210: 376-385 DOI: 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.17.18721.
• 37 Perlis N, Finelli A, Lovas M. et al. Creating patient-centered radiology reports to empower patients undergoing prostate magnetic resonance imaging. Can Urol Assoc J 2021; 15: 108-113 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.6585.
• 38 Fatahi N, Krupic F, Hellstrom M. Difficulties and possibilities in communication between referring clinicians and radiologists: perspective of clinicians. J Multidiscip Healthc 2019; 12: 555-564 DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S207649.
• 39 Dendl LM, Teufel A, Schleder S. et al. Analysis of Radiological Case Presentations and their Impact on Therapy and Treatment Concepts in Internal Medicine. Rofo 2017; 189: 239-246 DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-118884.
• 40 Nobel JM, Kok EM, Robben SGF. Redefining the structure of structured reporting in radiology. Insights Imaging 2020; 11: 10 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-019-0831-6.
• 41 Schwartz LH, Panicek DM, Berk AR. et al. Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting. Radiology 2011; 260: 174-181 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11101913.
• 42 Sadigh G, Hertweck T, Kao C. et al. Traditional text-only versus multimedia-enhanced radiology reporting: referring physicians' perceptions of value. J Am Coll Radiol 2015; 12: 519-524 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.11.009.
• 43 Iyer VR, Hahn PF, Blaszkowsky LS. et al. Added value of selected images embedded into radiology reports to referring clinicians. J Am Coll Radiol 2010; 7: 205-210 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2009.10.014.
• 44 Matalon SA, Guenette JP, Smith SE. et al. Factors Influencing Choice of Radiology and Relationship to Resident Job Satisfaction. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2019; 48: 333-341 DOI: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2018.03.008.
• 45 Oechtering TH, Panagiotopoulos N, Volker M. et al. Work and Training Conditions of German Residents in Radiology – Results from a Nationwide Survey Conducted by the Young Radiology Forum in the German Roentgen Society. Rofo 2020; 192: 458-470 DOI: 10.1055/a-1047-1075.
• 46 Raspe M, Vogelgesang A, Fendel J. et al. [Work and Training Conditions of Young German Physicians in Internal Medicine – Results of a Second Nationwide Survey by Young Internists from the German Society of Internal Medicine and the German Professional Association of Internists.]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2018; 143: e42-e50 DOI: 10.1055/a-0543-4544.
• 47 Arnold H, Meyer CP, Salem J. et al. [Work and training conditions of residents in urology in Germany: Results of a 2015 nationwide survey by the German Society of Residents in Urology]. Urologe A 2017; 56: 1311-1319 DOI: 10.1007/s00120-017-0495-0.
• 48 Hos D, Steven P, Dietrich-Ntoukas T. [The situation of residents in ophthalmology in Germany: Results of an online survey]. Ophthalmologe 2015; 112: 498-503 DOI: 10.1007/s00347-015-0030-x.
• 49 Unterweger M, Imhof S, Mohr H. et al. [Which factors influence job satisfaction and motivation in an institute of radiology?]. Praxis (Bern 1994) 2007; 96: 1299-1306 DOI: 10.1024/1661-8157.96.35.1299.
• 50 Siegrist J, Wege N, Puhlhofer F. et al. A short generic measure of work stress in the era of globalization: effort-reward imbalance. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2009; 82: 1005-1013 DOI: 10.1007/s00420-008-0384-3.