RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study is to evaluate patient understanding of radiology and radiologists and to assess patient interest in direct consultation with a radiologist. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1976 adult radiology outpatients at both a university and a nearby community hospital were surveyed. After an initial survey was administered, educational material with an attached follow-up survey was distributed to the patients. A McNemar test was used to assess the difference between patients who correctly chose the radiologist as the image interpreter before and after educational material was provided, whereas a paired t test was used to test the difference between patient levels of comfort with various image interpreters. RESULTS: Of the respondents, 84% expressed interest in meeting with a radiologist, with 43% willing to pay $0, 37% willing to pay $10-$30, and 20% willing to pay $40 or more to do so. Small percentages of respondents incorrectly identified ultrasound (10%) and MRI (45%) examinations as using radiation, whereas larger percentages of respondents correctly identified radiography (87%), CT (63%), and nuclear medicine imaging (62%) examinations as using radiation. A total of 73% of respondents (1002/1369) initially chose the radiologist as the image interpreter; this percentage improved to 81% (1109/1369) after the respondents received educational material (p < 0.0001). Both before and after educational material was provided, respondents had a statistically significantly lower mean (± SD) comfort level score (scale, 1-10) when faced with the prospect of a nurse or physician assistant interpreting their examination versus a trained physician (i.e., a radiologist) (mean score, 5.2 ± 3.27 and 9.4 ± 1.47, respectively, before education [p < 0.0001] and 5.2 ± 2.94 and 9.56 ± 1.24, respectively, after education [p < 0.0001]). CONCLUSION: The level of comfort with radiologists as image interpreters was statistically significantly higher than the level of comfort with nonradiologist interpreters, and most patients were interested in meeting with radiologists. Educational material improved patient perception and knowledge of radiology.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A nationwide outbreak of fungal infections was traced to injection of Exserohilum-contaminated methylprednisolone. We describe our experience with patients who developed spinal or paraspinal infection after injection of contaminated methylprednisolone. METHODS: Data were assembled from the Michigan Department of Community Health, electronic medical records, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports. RESULTS: Of 544 patients who received an epidural injection from a contaminated lot of methylprednisolone at a pain clinic in southeastern Michigan, 153 (28%) were diagnosed at our institution with probable or confirmed spinal or paraspinal fungal infection at the injection site. Forty-one patients had both meningitis and spinal or paraspinal infection, and 112 had only spinal or paraspinal infection. Magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities included abscess, phlegmon, arachnoiditis, and osteomyelitis. Surgical debridement in 116 patients revealed epidural phlegmon and epidural abscess most often. Among 26 patients with an abnormal MRI but with no increase or change in chronic pain, 19 (73%) had infection identified at surgery. Fungal infection was confirmed in 78 patients (51%) by finding hyphae in tissues, positive polymerase chain reaction, or culture. Initial therapy was voriconazole plus liposomal amphotericin B in 115 patients (75%) and voriconazole alone in 38 patients (25%). As of January 31, 2014, 20 patients remained on an azole agent. Five patients died of infection. CONCLUSIONS: We report on 153 patients who had spinal or paraspinal fungal infection at the site of epidural injection of contaminated methylprednisolone. One hundred sixteen (76%) underwent operative debridement in addition to treatment with antifungal agents.
RESUMO
IMPORTANCE: Injection of contaminated methylprednisolone has resulted in an unprecedented nationwide outbreak of Exserohilum rostratum fungal infections, manifested initially as meningitis and/or basilar stroke. Insidious onset of spinal or paraspinal infection at the injection site has been increasingly reported and is occurring months after receipt of injection with the contaminated drug. The clinical findings are often subtle and similar to those that led the patient to undergo the methylprednisolone injection. OBJECTIVE: To determine if patients who had not presented for medical care but who had received contaminated methylprednisolone developed spinal or paraspinal infection at the injection site using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: There were 172 patients who had received an injection of contaminated methylprednisolone from a highly contaminated lot (No. 06292012@26) at a pain facility but had not presented for medical care related to adverse effects after the injection. Screening MRI was performed between November 9, 2012, and April 30, 2013. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Number of persons identified with previously undiagnosed spinal or paraspinal infection. RESULTS: Of the 172 patients screened, MRI was abnormal in 36 (21%), showing epidural or paraspinal abscess or phlegmon, arachnoiditis, spinal osteomyelitis or diskitis, or moderate to severe epidural, paraspinal, or intradural enhancement. Of the 115 patients asked about new or worsening back or neck pain, lower extremity weakness, or radiculopathy symptoms, 35 (30%) had at least 1 symptom. Thirty-five of the 36 patients with abnormal MRIs met the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) case definition for probable (17 patients) or confirmed (18 patients) fungal spinal or paraspinal infection. All 35 patients were treated with antifungal agents (voriconazole, with or without liposomal amphotericin B), and 24 required surgical debridement. At the time of surgery, 17 of 24 patients (71%), including 5 patients who denied having symptoms, had laboratory evidence of fungal infection. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients who underwent screening MRI to look for infection at the site of injection of contaminated methylprednisolone, 21% had an abnormal MRI, and all but one met CDC criteria for probable or confirmed fungal spinal or paraspinal infection. Screening MRI led to identification of patients who had minimal or no symptoms of spinal or paraspinal infection and allowed early initiation of medical and surgical treatment.
