Psychological reactions in women undergoing fetal magnetic resonance imaging

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 111, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 396-402

  Leithner, Katharina ^a   Pörnbacher, Susanne ^a   Assem Hilger, Eva ^a   Krampl, Elisabeth ^a   Ponocny Seliger, Elisabeth ^a   Prayer, Daniela ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANXIETY; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; AUSTRIA; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONGENITAL MALFORMATION; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; EXERCISE; FEMALE; FETUS; HUMAN; NOISE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMAN; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE; TIME; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FETUS MONITORING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGIC ASSESSMENT; SCORING SYSTEM;

ADULT; ANXIETY; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; AUSTRIA; COHORT STUDIES; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; FETUS; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NOISE; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMEN; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESTRAINT, PHYSICAL; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 40749134662     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: 1873233X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181610281     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Levine D. Obstetric MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:1-15.
2. Prayer D, Brugger PC, Prayer L. Fetal MRI: techniques and protocols. Pediatr Radiol 2004;34:685-93.
3. Michel SC, Rake A, Götzmann L, Seifert B, Ferrazzini M, Chaoui R, et al. Pelvimetry and patient acceptability compared between open 0.5-T and closed 1.5-T MR systems. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2898-905.
4. Mackenzie R, Sims C, Owens RG, Dixon AK. Patients' perceptions of magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Radiol 1995;50:137-43.
5. Kilborn LC, Labbé EE. Magnetic resonance imaging scanning procedures: development of phobic response during scan and at one-month follow-up. J Behav Med 1990;13:391-401.
6. Friday PJ, Kubal WS. Magnetic resonance imaging: improved patient tolerance utilizing medical hypnosis. Am J Clin Hypn 1990;33:80-4.
7. Katz RC, Wilson L, Frazer N. Anxiety and its determinants in patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry 1994;25:131-4.
8. Melendez JC, McCrank E. Anxiety-related reactions associated with magnetic resonance imaging examinations. JAMA 1993;27:745-7.
9. Quirk ME, Letendre AJ, Ciottone RA, Lingley JF. Anxiety in patients undergoing MR imaging. Radiology 1989;170:463-6.
10. Thorp D, Owens RG, Whitehouse G, Dewey ME. Subjective experiences of magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Radiol 1990;41:276-8.
11. Dantendorfer K, Amering M, Bankier A, Helbich T, Prayer D, Youssefzadeh S, et al. A study of the effects of patient anxiety, perceptions and equipment on motion artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1997;15:301-6.
12. Cox DN, Wittmann BK, Hess M, Ross AG, Lind J, Lindahl S. The psychological impact of diagnostic ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:673-6.
13. Whynes DK. Receipt of information and women's attitudes towards ultrasound scanning during pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;19:7-12.
14. Leithner K, Assem-Hilger E, Fischer-Kern M, Löffler-Statska H, Thien R, Ponocny-Seliger E. Prenatal care: the patient's perspective. A qualitative study. Prenat Diagn 2006;26:931-7.
15. Prayer D, Brugger PC, Krampl E, Prayer L. Indications for fetal magnetic resonance imaging [in German]. Radiologe 2006;46:98-104.
16. Kasprian G, Balassy C, Brugger PC, Prayer D. MRI of normal and pathological fetal lung development. Eur J Radiol 2006;57:261-70.
17. Laux L, Glanzmann P, Schaffner P, Spielberger CD. State-Trait-Angstinventar (STAI). Weinheim, Germany: Beltz Testgesellschaft; 1991.
18. Beck AT, Rial WY, Rickels K. Short form of depression inventory: cross-validation. Psychol Rep 1974;34:1184-6.