Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Informed Consent for Radiation in Interventional Radiology Procedures

Informed Consent for Radiation in Interventional Radiology Procedures PurposeTo explore the patient perception on radiation-related cancer risk from interventional radiology (IR) procedures and whether informed radiation consent is warranted.MethodsA 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).ResultsA 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.ConclusionsMany 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. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal SAGE

Informed Consent for Radiation in Interventional Radiology Procedures

Download PDF
8 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/informed-consent-for-radiation-in-interventional-radiology-procedures-Pm0am0njfM

References (38)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 2018 Canadian Association of Radiologists
ISSN
0846-5371
eISSN
1488-2361
DOI
10.1016/j.carj.2017.07.002
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

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

Journal

Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal – SAGE

Published: Feb 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.