Cargando…
Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the subjectively perceived patient comfort during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations and to assess potential differences between a recently introduced low field MRI scanner and a standard MRI scanner. Among other characteristics, the low fi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10681562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38013308 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000036069 |
_version_ | 1785150818441232384 |
---|---|
author | Michael, Arwed Elias Heuser, Andreas Moenninghoff, Christoph Surov, Alexey Borggrefe, Jan Kroeger, Jan Robert Niehoff, Julius Henning |
author_facet | Michael, Arwed Elias Heuser, Andreas Moenninghoff, Christoph Surov, Alexey Borggrefe, Jan Kroeger, Jan Robert Niehoff, Julius Henning |
author_sort | Michael, Arwed Elias |
collection | PubMed |
description | The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the subjectively perceived patient comfort during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations and to assess potential differences between a recently introduced low field MRI scanner and a standard MRI scanner. Among other characteristics, the low field MRI scanner differs from the standard MRI scanner by offering more space (wider bore size of 80 centimeter diameter) and producing less noise, which may influence the patient comfort. In total, 177 patients were surveyed after MRI scans with either the low field MRI scanner (n = 91, MAGNETOM Free.Max, Siemens Healthineers) or the standard MRI scanner (n = 86, MAGNETOM Avanto Fit, Siemens Healthineers). Patients rated different aspects of comfort on a 5 point Likert scale: (a) claustrophobia, (b) comfort of the scanner table, (c) noise level and (d) vertigo during the scanning procedure. In terms of claustrophobia and comfort of the scanner table, patients rated both MRI scanners similar (e.g., mean ratings for claustrophobia: standard MRI scanner = 4.63 ± 1.04, low field MRI scanner = 4.65 ± 1.02). However, when asked for a comparison, patients did favor the more spacious low field MRI scanner. In terms of noise level, the low field MRI scanner was rated significantly better (mean ratings: standard MRI scanner = 3.72 ± 1.46 [median 4 = “rather not unpleasant”], low field MRI scanner = 4.26 ± 1.22 [median 5 = “not unpleasant at all”]). Patients did not perceive any significant difference in terms of vertigo between both MRI scanners. The newly developed low field MRI scanner offers constructional differences compared to standard MRI scanners that are perceived positively by patients. Worth highlighting is the significantly lower noise level and the innovative bore diameter of 80 centimeter, which offers more space to the patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10681562 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106815622023-11-24 Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging Michael, Arwed Elias Heuser, Andreas Moenninghoff, Christoph Surov, Alexey Borggrefe, Jan Kroeger, Jan Robert Niehoff, Julius Henning Medicine (Baltimore) 6800 The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the subjectively perceived patient comfort during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations and to assess potential differences between a recently introduced low field MRI scanner and a standard MRI scanner. Among other characteristics, the low field MRI scanner differs from the standard MRI scanner by offering more space (wider bore size of 80 centimeter diameter) and producing less noise, which may influence the patient comfort. In total, 177 patients were surveyed after MRI scans with either the low field MRI scanner (n = 91, MAGNETOM Free.Max, Siemens Healthineers) or the standard MRI scanner (n = 86, MAGNETOM Avanto Fit, Siemens Healthineers). Patients rated different aspects of comfort on a 5 point Likert scale: (a) claustrophobia, (b) comfort of the scanner table, (c) noise level and (d) vertigo during the scanning procedure. In terms of claustrophobia and comfort of the scanner table, patients rated both MRI scanners similar (e.g., mean ratings for claustrophobia: standard MRI scanner = 4.63 ± 1.04, low field MRI scanner = 4.65 ± 1.02). However, when asked for a comparison, patients did favor the more spacious low field MRI scanner. In terms of noise level, the low field MRI scanner was rated significantly better (mean ratings: standard MRI scanner = 3.72 ± 1.46 [median 4 = “rather not unpleasant”], low field MRI scanner = 4.26 ± 1.22 [median 5 = “not unpleasant at all”]). Patients did not perceive any significant difference in terms of vertigo between both MRI scanners. The newly developed low field MRI scanner offers constructional differences compared to standard MRI scanners that are perceived positively by patients. Worth highlighting is the significantly lower noise level and the innovative bore diameter of 80 centimeter, which offers more space to the patients. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10681562/ /pubmed/38013308 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000036069 Text en Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | 6800 Michael, Arwed Elias Heuser, Andreas Moenninghoff, Christoph Surov, Alexey Borggrefe, Jan Kroeger, Jan Robert Niehoff, Julius Henning Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging |
title | Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging |
title_full | Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging |
title_fullStr | Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging |
title_full_unstemmed | Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging |
title_short | Does bore size matter?—A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging |
title_sort | does bore size matter?—a comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 tesla) and standard (1.5 tesla) mri imaging |
topic | 6800 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10681562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38013308 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000036069 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT michaelarwedelias doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging AT heuserandreas doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging AT moenninghoffchristoph doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging AT surovalexey doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging AT borggrefejan doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging AT kroegerjanrobert doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging AT niehoffjuliushenning doesboresizematteracomparisonofthesubjectiveperceptionofpatientcomfortduringlowfield055teslaandstandard15teslamriimaging |