Use of an Online Education Platform to Enhance Patients' Knowledge About Radiation in Diagnostic Imaging.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the impact of a digital interactive education platform and standard paper-based education on patients' knowledge regarding ionizing radiation. METHODS: Beginning in January 2015, patients at a tertiary cancer center scheduled for diagnostic imaging procedures were randomized to receive information about ionizing radiation delivered through a web-based interactive education platform (interactive education group), the same information in document format (document education group), or no specialized education (control group). Patients who completed at least some education and control group patients were invited to complete a knowledge assessment; interactive education patients were invited to provide feedback about satisfaction with their experience. RESULTS: A total of 2,226 patients participated. Surveys were completed by 302 of 745 patients (40.5%) participating in interactive education, 488 of 993 (49.1%) participating in document education, and 363 of 488 (74.4%) in the control group. Patients in the interactive education group were significantly more likely to say that they knew the definition of ionizing radiation, outperformed the other groups in identifying which imaging examinations used ionizing radiation, were significantly more likely to identify from a list which imaging modality had the highest radiation dose, and tended to perform better when asked about the tissue effects of radiation in diagnostic imaging, although this difference was not significant. In the interactive education group, 84% of patients were satisfied with the experience, and 79% said that they would recommend the program. CONCLUSIONS: Complex information on a highly technical subject with personal implications for patients may be conveyed more effectively using electronic platforms, and this approach is well accepted.

Oncology Patient Perceptions of the Use of Ionizing Radiation in Diagnostic Imaging.

PURPOSE: To measure the knowledge of oncology patients regarding use and potential risks of ionizing radiation in diagnostic imaging. METHODS: A 30-question survey was developed and e-mailed to 48,736 randomly selected patients who had undergone a diagnostic imaging study at a comprehensive cancer center between November 1, 2013 and January 31, 2014. The survey was designed to measure patients' knowledge about use of ionizing radiation in diagnostic imaging and attitudes about radiation. Nonresponse bias was quantified by sending an abbreviated survey to patients who did not respond to the original survey. RESULTS: Of the 48,736 individuals who were sent the initial survey, 9,098 (18.7%) opened it, and 5,462 (11.2%) completed it. A total of 21.7% of respondents reported knowing the definition of ionizing radiation; 35.1% stated correctly that CT used ionizing radiation; and 29.4% stated incorrectly that MRI used ionizing radiation. Many respondents did not understand risks from exposure to diagnostic doses of ionizing radiation: Of 3,139 respondents who believed that an abdominopelvic CT scan carried risk, 1,283 (40.9%) believed sterility was a risk; 669 (21.3%) believed heritable mutations were a risk; 657 (20.9%) believed acute radiation sickness was a risk; and 135 (4.3%) believed cataracts were a risk. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients and caregivers do not possess basic knowledge regarding the use of ionizing radiation in oncologic diagnostic imaging. To ensure health literacy and high-quality patient decision making, efforts to educate patients and caregivers should be increased. Such education might begin with information about effects that are not risks of diagnostic imaging.

Why bundled payments could drive innovation: an example from interventional oncology.

Some have suggested that the current fee-for-service health care payment system in the United States stifles innovation. However, there are few published examples supporting this concept. We implemented an innovative temporary balloon occlusion technique for yttrium 90 radioembolization of nonresectable liver cancer. Although our balloon occlusion technique was associated with similar patient outcomes, lower cost, and faster procedure times compared with the standard-of-care coil embolization technique, our technique failed to gain widespread acceptance. Financial analysis revealed that because the balloon occlusion technique avoided a procedural step associated with a lucrative Current Procedural Terminology billing code, this new technique resulted in a significant decrease in hospital and physician revenue in the current fee-for-service payment system, even though the new technique would provide a revenue enhancement through cost savings in a bundled payment system. Our analysis illustrates how in a fee-for-service payment system, financial disincentives can stifle innovation and advancement of health care delivery.

Health Care Delivery Meets Hospitality: A Pilot Study in Radiology.

The patient experience has moved to the forefront of health care-delivery research. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Department of Diagnostic Radiology began collaborating in 2011 with the University of Houston Conrad N. Hilton College of Hotel and Restaurant Management, and in 2013 with the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William F. Harrah College of Hotel Administration, to explore the application of service science to improving the patient experience. A collaborative pilot study was undertaken by these 3 institutions to identify and rank the specific needs and expectations of patients undergoing imaging procedures in the MD Anderson Department of Diagnostic Radiology. We first conducted interviews with patients, providers, and staff to identify factors perceived to affect the patient experience. Next, to confirm these factors and determine their relative importance, we surveyed more than 6,000 patients by e-mail. All factors considered important in the interviews were confirmed as important in the surveys. The surveys showed that the most important factors were acknowledgment of the patient's concerns, being treated with respect, and being treated like a person, not a "number"; these factors were more important than privacy, short waiting times, being able to meet with a radiologist, and being approached by a staff member versus having one's name called out in the waiting room. Our work shows that it is possible to identify and rank factors affecting patient satisfaction using techniques employed by the hospitality industry. Such factors can be used to measure and improve the patient experience.

Improving patient access to an interventional US clinic.

A continuous quality improvement project was conducted to increase patient access to a neurointerventional ultrasonography (US) clinic. The clinic was experiencing major scheduling delays because of an increasing patient volume. A multidisciplinary team was formed that included schedulers, medical assistants, nurses, technologists, and physicians. The team created an Ishikawa diagram of the possible causes of the long wait time to the next available appointment and developed a flowchart of the steps involved in scheduling and completing a diagnostic US examination and biopsy. The team then implemented a staged intervention that included adjustments to staffing and room use (stage 1); new procedures for scheduling same-day add-on appointments (stage 2); and a lead technician rotation to optimize patient flow, staffing, and workflow (stage 3). Six months after initiation of the intervention, the mean time to the next available appointment had decreased from 25 days at baseline to 1 day, and the number of available daily appointments had increased from 38 to 55. These improvements resulted from a coordinated provider effort and had a net present value of more than $275,000. This project demonstrates that structural changes in staffing, workflow, and room use can substantially reduce scheduling delays for critical imaging procedures.