Cargando…

Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges

BACKGROUND: Returning neuroimaging incidental findings (IF) may create a challenge to research participants’ health literacy skills as they must interpret and make appropriate healthcare decisions based on complex radiology jargon. Disclosing IF can therefore present difficulties for participants, r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rancher, Caitlin E., Shoemaker, Jody M., Petree, Linda E., Holdsworth, Mark, Phillips, John P., Helitzer, Deborah L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5057374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27724936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0141-1
_version_ 1782459055451668480
author Rancher, Caitlin E.
Shoemaker, Jody M.
Petree, Linda E.
Holdsworth, Mark
Phillips, John P.
Helitzer, Deborah L.
author_facet Rancher, Caitlin E.
Shoemaker, Jody M.
Petree, Linda E.
Holdsworth, Mark
Phillips, John P.
Helitzer, Deborah L.
author_sort Rancher, Caitlin E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Returning neuroimaging incidental findings (IF) may create a challenge to research participants’ health literacy skills as they must interpret and make appropriate healthcare decisions based on complex radiology jargon. Disclosing IF can therefore present difficulties for participants, research institutions and the healthcare system. The purpose of this study was to identify the extent of the health literacy challenges encountered when returning neuroimaging IF. We report on findings from a retrospective survey and focus group sessions with major stakeholders involved in disclosing IF. METHODS: We surveyed participants who had received a radiology report from a research study and conducted focus groups with participants, parents of child participants, Institutional Review Board (IRB) members, investigators and physicians. Qualitative thematic analyses were conducted using standard group-coding procedures and descriptive summaries of health literacy scores and radiology report outcomes are examined. RESULTS: Although participants reported high health literacy skills (m = 87.3 on a scale of 1–100), 67 % did not seek medical care when recommended to do so; and many participants in the focus groups disclosed they could not understand the findings described in their report. Despite their lack of understanding, participants desire to have information about their radiology results, and the investigators feel ethically inclined to return findings. CONCLUSIONS: The language in clinically useful radiology reports can create a challenge for participants’ health literacy skills and has the potential to negatively impact the healthcare system and investigators conducting imaging research. Radiology reports need accompanying resources that explain findings in lay language, which can help reduce the challenge caused by the need to communicate incidental findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5057374
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50573742016-10-20 Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges Rancher, Caitlin E. Shoemaker, Jody M. Petree, Linda E. Holdsworth, Mark Phillips, John P. Helitzer, Deborah L. BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: Returning neuroimaging incidental findings (IF) may create a challenge to research participants’ health literacy skills as they must interpret and make appropriate healthcare decisions based on complex radiology jargon. Disclosing IF can therefore present difficulties for participants, research institutions and the healthcare system. The purpose of this study was to identify the extent of the health literacy challenges encountered when returning neuroimaging IF. We report on findings from a retrospective survey and focus group sessions with major stakeholders involved in disclosing IF. METHODS: We surveyed participants who had received a radiology report from a research study and conducted focus groups with participants, parents of child participants, Institutional Review Board (IRB) members, investigators and physicians. Qualitative thematic analyses were conducted using standard group-coding procedures and descriptive summaries of health literacy scores and radiology report outcomes are examined. RESULTS: Although participants reported high health literacy skills (m = 87.3 on a scale of 1–100), 67 % did not seek medical care when recommended to do so; and many participants in the focus groups disclosed they could not understand the findings described in their report. Despite their lack of understanding, participants desire to have information about their radiology results, and the investigators feel ethically inclined to return findings. CONCLUSIONS: The language in clinically useful radiology reports can create a challenge for participants’ health literacy skills and has the potential to negatively impact the healthcare system and investigators conducting imaging research. Radiology reports need accompanying resources that explain findings in lay language, which can help reduce the challenge caused by the need to communicate incidental findings. BioMed Central 2016-10-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5057374/ /pubmed/27724936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0141-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rancher, Caitlin E.
Shoemaker, Jody M.
Petree, Linda E.
Holdsworth, Mark
Phillips, John P.
Helitzer, Deborah L.
Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
title Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
title_full Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
title_fullStr Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
title_full_unstemmed Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
title_short Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
title_sort disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5057374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27724936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0141-1
work_keys_str_mv AT ranchercaitline disclosingneuroimagingincidentalfindingsaqualitativethematicanalysisofhealthliteracychallenges
AT shoemakerjodym disclosingneuroimagingincidentalfindingsaqualitativethematicanalysisofhealthliteracychallenges
AT petreelindae disclosingneuroimagingincidentalfindingsaqualitativethematicanalysisofhealthliteracychallenges
AT holdsworthmark disclosingneuroimagingincidentalfindingsaqualitativethematicanalysisofhealthliteracychallenges
AT phillipsjohnp disclosingneuroimagingincidentalfindingsaqualitativethematicanalysisofhealthliteracychallenges
AT helitzerdeborahl disclosingneuroimagingincidentalfindingsaqualitativethematicanalysisofhealthliteracychallenges