Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Diagnostic bone imaging in patients with prostate cancer: patient experience and acceptance of NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, whole-body MRI, and bone SPECT/CT

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{6956730e78ea4c5caa4d5c072281eda3,
title = "Diagnostic bone imaging in patients with prostate cancer: patient experience and acceptance of NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, whole-body MRI, and bone SPECT/CT",
abstract = "Background Patient acceptance is an important factor when implementing imaging methods in clinical practice in line with availability, diagnostic accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Purpose To investigate patient experience and acceptance regarding18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), 11 C-choline-PET/CT, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI), and 99mTc-hydroxymethane diphosphonate (HDP) single photon emission/computed tomography (SPECT/CT). Material and Methods One hundred and forty-nine patients with prostate cancer filled in a questionnaire regarding their experience of the imaging procedures they had been undergoing as part of a diagnostic accuracy study. Each patient had been undergoing a NaF-PET/CT, a WB-MRI, and either a SPECT/CT (group A) or a choline-PET/CT (group B). Results All four imaging methods received overall experience ratings at the favorable end of a 5-point Likert scale with the two PET/CT scans receiving marginally better average ratings (2.0) compared to SPECT/CT (2.2) and WB-MRI (2.3). The arm positioning above the head was the most uncomfortable part of the three nuclear medicine scans, whereas the acoustic noise was the most unpleasant part of the WB-MRI. The experience of staff instruction was relatively strongly correlated to the overall scanning experience of all four imaging modalities. Overall, the patients were willing to repeat the four imaging methods and NaF-PET/CT was the method most preferred in both groups. Conclusion Four imaging procedures were evaluated from the perspective of a selected group of prostate cancer patients. NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, WB-MRI, and bone SPECT/CT are well accepted imaging methods, and most patients prefer NaF-PET/CT.",
keywords = "Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bone Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging, Choline, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography, Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology, Radiopharmaceuticals, Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography, Sodium Fluoride, Surveys and Questionnaires, Technetium Tc 99m Medronate/analogs & derivatives, Whole Body Imaging",
author = "Eva Dyrberg and Larsen, {Emil L} and Hendel, {Helle W} and Thomsen, {Henrik S}",
year = "2018",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1177/0284185117751280",
language = "English",
volume = "59",
pages = "1119--1125",
journal = "Acta Radiologica",
issn = "0284-1851",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "9",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnostic bone imaging in patients with prostate cancer

T2 - patient experience and acceptance of NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, whole-body MRI, and bone SPECT/CT

AU - Dyrberg, Eva

AU - Larsen, Emil L

AU - Hendel, Helle W

AU - Thomsen, Henrik S

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - Background Patient acceptance is an important factor when implementing imaging methods in clinical practice in line with availability, diagnostic accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Purpose To investigate patient experience and acceptance regarding18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), 11 C-choline-PET/CT, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI), and 99mTc-hydroxymethane diphosphonate (HDP) single photon emission/computed tomography (SPECT/CT). Material and Methods One hundred and forty-nine patients with prostate cancer filled in a questionnaire regarding their experience of the imaging procedures they had been undergoing as part of a diagnostic accuracy study. Each patient had been undergoing a NaF-PET/CT, a WB-MRI, and either a SPECT/CT (group A) or a choline-PET/CT (group B). Results All four imaging methods received overall experience ratings at the favorable end of a 5-point Likert scale with the two PET/CT scans receiving marginally better average ratings (2.0) compared to SPECT/CT (2.2) and WB-MRI (2.3). The arm positioning above the head was the most uncomfortable part of the three nuclear medicine scans, whereas the acoustic noise was the most unpleasant part of the WB-MRI. The experience of staff instruction was relatively strongly correlated to the overall scanning experience of all four imaging modalities. Overall, the patients were willing to repeat the four imaging methods and NaF-PET/CT was the method most preferred in both groups. Conclusion Four imaging procedures were evaluated from the perspective of a selected group of prostate cancer patients. NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, WB-MRI, and bone SPECT/CT are well accepted imaging methods, and most patients prefer NaF-PET/CT.

AB - Background Patient acceptance is an important factor when implementing imaging methods in clinical practice in line with availability, diagnostic accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Purpose To investigate patient experience and acceptance regarding18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), 11 C-choline-PET/CT, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI), and 99mTc-hydroxymethane diphosphonate (HDP) single photon emission/computed tomography (SPECT/CT). Material and Methods One hundred and forty-nine patients with prostate cancer filled in a questionnaire regarding their experience of the imaging procedures they had been undergoing as part of a diagnostic accuracy study. Each patient had been undergoing a NaF-PET/CT, a WB-MRI, and either a SPECT/CT (group A) or a choline-PET/CT (group B). Results All four imaging methods received overall experience ratings at the favorable end of a 5-point Likert scale with the two PET/CT scans receiving marginally better average ratings (2.0) compared to SPECT/CT (2.2) and WB-MRI (2.3). The arm positioning above the head was the most uncomfortable part of the three nuclear medicine scans, whereas the acoustic noise was the most unpleasant part of the WB-MRI. The experience of staff instruction was relatively strongly correlated to the overall scanning experience of all four imaging modalities. Overall, the patients were willing to repeat the four imaging methods and NaF-PET/CT was the method most preferred in both groups. Conclusion Four imaging procedures were evaluated from the perspective of a selected group of prostate cancer patients. NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, WB-MRI, and bone SPECT/CT are well accepted imaging methods, and most patients prefer NaF-PET/CT.

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Bone Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging

KW - Choline

KW - Humans

KW - Magnetic Resonance Imaging

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Patient Acceptance of Health Care

KW - Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography

KW - Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology

KW - Radiopharmaceuticals

KW - Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography

KW - Sodium Fluoride

KW - Surveys and Questionnaires

KW - Technetium Tc 99m Medronate/analogs & derivatives

KW - Whole Body Imaging

U2 - 10.1177/0284185117751280

DO - 10.1177/0284185117751280

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29313360

VL - 59

SP - 1119

EP - 1125

JO - Acta Radiologica

JF - Acta Radiologica

SN - 0284-1851

IS - 9

ER -

ID: 55742222