open access
Background
Claustrophobia
is a common problem precluding MR imaging. The purpose of the present
study was to assess whether a
short-bore or an open magnetic resonance
(MR) scanner is superior in alleviating claustrophobia.
Methods
Institutional
review board approval and patient informed consent were obtained to
compare short-bore versus open MR.
From June 2008 to August 2009, 174
patients (139 women; mean age = 53.1 [SD 12.8]) with an overall mean
score of 2.4 (SD 0.7, range 0 to 4) on the Claustrophobia Questionnaire
(CLQ) and a clinical indication for imaging, were randomly assigned to
receive evaluation by open or by short-bore MR.
The primary outcomes
were incomplete MR examinations due to a claustrophobic event. Follow-up
was conducted 7 months after MR imaging. The primary analysis was
performed according to the intention-to-treat strategy.
Results
With
33 claustrophobic events in the short-bore group (39% [95% confidence
interval [CI] 28% to 50%) versus 23 in the open scanner group (26% [95%
CI 18% to 37%];
P = 0.08)
the difference was not significant.
Patients with an event were in the examination room for 3.8 min (SD 4.4)
in the short-bore and for 8.5 min (SD 7) in the open group (
P =
0.004). This was due to an earlier occurrence of events in the
short-bore group. The CLQ suffocation subscale was significantly
associated with the occurrence of claustrophobic events (
P =
0.003). New findings that explained symptoms were found in 69% of MR
examinations and led to changes in medical treatment in 47% and surgery
in 10% of patients. After 7 months, perceived claustrophobia increased
in 32% of patients with events versus in only 11% of patients without
events (
P = 0.004).
Conclusions
Even
recent MR cannot prevent claustrophobia suggesting that further
developments to create a more patient-centered MR scanner environment
are needed.
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.