Journal of perinatal medicine · 2018
Fetal MRI, lower acceptance by women in research vs. clinical setting.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van der Knoop Bloeme J, Vermeulen Roland J, Verbeke Jonathan I M L, Pistorius Lourens R, de Vries Johanna I P
Аннотация
AIM: To determine acceptance of pregnant women to undergo fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination in research and clinical setting.
METHODS: A prospective study included a research group [part of a study comparing brain ultrasound (US) to MRI in fetuses at risk for acquired brain damage] and a clinical group [fetuses with suspected (brain) anomalies after structural US examination] from 2011 to 2014. All women were advised to use sedatives. MRI declinations, use of sedation, MRI duration and imaging quality were compared between both groups.
RESULTS: Study participation was accepted in 57/104 (55%) research cases. Fetal MRI was performed in 34/104 (33%) research and 43/44 (98%) clinical cases. Reasons to decline study participation were MRI related in 41%, and participation was too burdensome in 46%. Acceptance was highest for indication infection and lowest in alloimmune thrombocytopenia and monochorionic twin pregnancy. Sedatives were used in 14/34 research and 43/43 clinical cases. Scan duration and quality were comparable (21 and 20 min in research and clinical cases, respectively, moderate/good quality in both groups).
CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women consider MRI more burdensome than professionals realize. Two-third of women at risk for fetal brain damage decline MRI examination. Future studies should evaluate which information about fetal MRI is supportive.
METHODS: A prospective study included a research group [part of a study comparing brain ultrasound (US) to MRI in fetuses at risk for acquired brain damage] and a clinical group [fetuses with suspected (brain) anomalies after structural US examination] from 2011 to 2014. All women were advised to use sedatives. MRI declinations, use of sedation, MRI duration and imaging quality were compared between both groups.
RESULTS: Study participation was accepted in 57/104 (55%) research cases. Fetal MRI was performed in 34/104 (33%) research and 43/44 (98%) clinical cases. Reasons to decline study participation were MRI related in 41%, and participation was too burdensome in 46%. Acceptance was highest for indication infection and lowest in alloimmune thrombocytopenia and monochorionic twin pregnancy. Sedatives were used in 14/34 research and 43/43 clinical cases. Scan duration and quality were comparable (21 and 20 min in research and clinical cases, respectively, moderate/good quality in both groups).
CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women consider MRI more burdensome than professionals realize. Two-third of women at risk for fetal brain damage decline MRI examination. Future studies should evaluate which information about fetal MRI is supportive.