The information needs of people attending for computed tomography (CT): What are they and how can they be met?

Patient Education and Counseling

Volumn 77, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 272-278

  Mathers, Sandra A ^a,b   Chesson, Rosemary A ^c   McKenzie, Graham A ^b  

^a ROBERT GORDON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b NHS Grampian ^*  (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Computed tomography (CT); Education; Imaging; Patient information; Patient knowledge

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FAMILY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM; STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCOTLAND; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 70350168827     PISSN: 07383991     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.030     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ellis S.M., Husband J.E., Armstring P., and Hansell D.M. Computed tomography screening for lung cancer: back to basics. Clin Rad 56 (2001) 691-699
2. Healthcare Commission. An improving picture? Imaging services in acute and specialist trust. London; 2007.
3. Wilson Barnett J. Patients emotional responses to barium X-rays. J Adv Nurs 3 (1978) 37-46
4. Murphy F. Understanding the humanistic interaction with medical imaging technology. Radiography 7 (2001) 193-201
5. Coulter A., Entwhistle V., and Gilbert D. Informing patients: an assessment of the quality of patient information materials (1998), Kings Fund, London
6. Duman M., and Farrell C. Practicalities of producing patient information (2000), Kings Fund, London
7. Charnock D. The DISCERN handbook: quality criteria for consumer health information on treatment choices (1998), Radcliffe Medical Press, Oxford
8. Lowe D.B., Sharma A.K., and Leathley M.J. The CareFile project: a feasibility study to examine the effects of an individualised information booklet on patients after stroke. Age Aging 36 (2007) 83-89
9. Stewart A., Sodhi V., Harper N., and Yentis S.M. Assessment of the effect upon maternal knowledge of an information leaflet about pain relief in labour. Anaesthesia 58 (2003) 1015-1019
10. Hughes L., Whittlesea C., and Luscombe D. Patients' knowledge and perceptions of the side-effects of OTC medication. J Clin Pharm Ther 27 (2002) 243-248
11. Katz M.G., Kriplani S., and Weiss B.D. Use of pictorial aids in medical instructions: a review of the literature. AM J Health Syst Pharm 63 (2006) 2391-2397
12. Mathers S., Chesson R., and McKenzie G. Informed consent for radiological procedures: a Scottish study. Clin Gov: Int J 10 (2005) 139-147
13. Mayberry M.K., and Mayberry J.F. Towards better informed consent in endoscopy: a study of information and consent processes in gastroscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 13 (2001) 1467-1476
14. Langdon I.J., Hardin R., and Learmonth I.D. Informed consent for total hip arthroplasty: does written information show improved recall by patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84 (2002) 404-408
15. Nielsen-Bohlman L.T., Panzer A., and Kindig D. Health literacy-a prescription to end confusion (2004), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
16. Van Zureen F.J., Grypdonck M., Crevits E., Walle C.V., and Defloor T. The effect of an information brochure on patients undergoing endoscopy: a randomised control trial. Patient Educ Couns 64 (2006) 173-182
17. Onyeka B.A., and Martin-Hirsch P. Information leaflets, verbal information and women's knowledge of abnormal cervical smears and colposcopy. J Obstet Gynaecol 23 (2003) 174-176
18. Pool K., Hood K., Davis B.D., Monypenny I.J., Sweetland H., Webster D.J., Lyons K., and Mansell R.E. Psychological distress associated with waiting for results of diagnostic investigations for breast cancer. Breast 8 (1999) 334-338
19. CancerBACUP. Understanding breast screening (2004), Ashford Colour Press, London
20. Hjelm-Karlsson K. Effects of information to patients undergoing intravenous pyelography: an interventional study. J Adv Nurs 14 (1989) 853-862
21. Flam B. Effects of preparatory information of a myelogram on patients' expectations and anxiety levels. Patient Educ Couns 14 (1989) 115-126
22. Department of Health. The new NHS: modern and dependable (1997), Department of Health, London
23. Scottish Executive. Patient focus and public involvement (2001), HMSO, Edinburgh
24. Marshall L.A., and Williams D. Health information: does quality count for the consumer? How consumers evaluate the quality of health information materials across a variety of media. J Lib Inf Sci 38 (2006) 141-156
25. Department of Health. The patient charter (1992), Department of Health, London
26. Scottish Executive. National eHealth/IM&T strategy 2004-2008. Available from http://www.scot.nhs.uk/public/publicindex.htm [Accessed 25 October, 2007].
27. NHS Executive. Cancer information strategy. Available from: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/NationalServiceFrameworks/Cancer/DH_4 068587 [Accessed 25 October, 2007].
28. Chesson R., McKenzie G., and Mathers S. What do patients know about ultrasound, CT and MRI?. Clin Radiol 57 (2002) 452-477
29. Cohen L., and Holliday M. Statistics for social scientists (1982), Harper and Row, London
30. Pope C., Zeibland S., and Mays N. Qualitative research in health care. Analysing the data. Br Med J 320 (2000) 114-116
31. Dixon-Woods M. Writing wrongs? An analysis of published discourses about the use of patient information leaflets. Soc Sci Med 52 (2001) 1417-1432
32. Kenny T., Wilson R.G., Purves I.N., Clark J., Newton L.D., Newton D.P., and Moseley D.V. A PIL for every ill? Patient information leaflets (PILS); a review of past, present and future use. Fam Pract 15 5 (2008) 471-479
33. McGhee J.B., Houston G., and Chesson R. 3-D computer arts in clinical radiology. 34th international conference and exhibition on computer graphics and interactivity. San Diego (2007)
34. Coulter A. Paternalism or partnership?. Br Med J 319 (1999) 719-720
35. Davies L., Laasch H.-U., Wilbraham L., Marriott A., England R.E., and Martin D.F. The consent process in interventional radiology: the role of the specialist nurses. Clin Radiol 59 (2004) 246-252
36. Bowman S., and Francis W. Tackling health inequalities by improving access to services for people with learning disabilities. 15th UKPHA annual public health forum. Edinburgh (2007)
37. Bleckinsopp A., Bashford J., and Dickinson D. Health professionals need to identify how much information patients want. Br Med J 317 (1998) 413
38. Meredith P., Emberton M., Wood C., and Smith J. Comparison of patient needs for information on prostate surgery with printed materials provided by surgeons. Qual Health Care 4 (1995) 18-23
39. Suhonen R., Nenonen H., Laukka A., and Valimaki M. Patients' informational needs and information received do not correspond in hospital. J Clin Nurs 14 (2005) 1167-1176
40. Mathers S.A., Chesson R.A., Proctor J.M., McKenzie G.A., and Robertson E. The use of patient centred outcomes in radiology: a systematic review. Acad Radiol 13 (2006) 1394-1404
41. Turner W., and Williams C. Informed consent: patients listen and read, but what information do they retain?. N Z Med J 115 (2002) 218
42. Society College of Radiographers (United Kingdom). Consent to imaging and radiotherapy treatment examinations: An ethical perspective and good practice guide for the radiography workforce (2007), SCoR, London
43. Chesson R.A., Good M., and Hart C.L. Will it hurt? Patients' experience of X-ray examinations: a pilot study. Pediatr Radiol 32 (2002) 67-73