Trial reportPloS one2011
Reduction of claustrophobia with short-bore versus open magnetic resonance imaging: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00715806 (Reduction of Claustrophobia During Magnetic Resonance Imaging), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Reduction of Claustrophobia During Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Randomized, Controlled Trial
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient preferences for development in MRI scanner design: a survey of claustrophobic patients in a randomized study.European radiology · 2021Trial
- High-field open versus short-bore magnetic resonance imaging of the spine: a randomized controlled comparison of image quality.PloS one · 2013Trial
- Patient experience and acceptance of a lightweight, compact 3 Tesla MRI system.Radiography (London, England : 1995) · 2026Article
- [American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Review
- Digital X-ray Tomography in the Clinical Diagnosis of Suspected Neck of Femur Fractures.Cureus · 2025Article
- Recent Advances in Image-Guided Tissue Sampling.Cureus · 2024Review
- Compliance of volunteers in a fully-enclosed patient rotation system for MR-guided radiation therapy: a prospective study.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Investigation and analysis of magnetic resonance imaging experience and psychological status of patients.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Preparing patients according to their individual coping style improves patient experience of magnetic resonance imaging.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Management of the Adnexal Mass: Considerations for the Family Medicine Physician.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Audio-guided self-hypnosis for reduction of claustrophobia during MR imaging: results of an observational 2-group study.European radiology · 2021Observational
- The use of structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound ensures time-efficiency and report quality during residency.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2020Article
- A study of the relationship between the level of anxiety declared by MRI patients in the STAI questionnaire and their respiratory rate acquired by a fibre-optic sensor system.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Effect of High-quality Nursing on Improvement of Anxiety and Depression of Patients with Acute Stroke in MRI Examination.Iranian journal of public health · 2017Article
- [Acceptance of dementia diagnostics by getriatric hospital patients : Comparison of various investigation methods with emphasis on FDG-PET imaging].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2017Article
- Effect of team training on improving MRI study completion rates and no-show rates.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2016Article
- Use of a 1.0 Tesla open scanner for evaluation of pediatric and congenital heart disease: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClaustrophobia is a common problem precluding MR imaging. The purpose of the present study was to assess whether a short-bore or an open magnetic resonance (MR) scanner is superior in alleviating claustrophobia.
methodsInstitutional review board approval and patient informed consent were obtained to compare short-bore versus open MR. From June 2008 to August 2009, 174 patients (139 women; mean age = 53.1 [SD 12.8]) with an overall mean score of 2.4 (SD 0.7, range 0 to 4) on the Claustrophobia Questionnaire (CLQ) and a clinical indication for imaging, were randomly assigned to receive evaluation by open or by short-bore MR. The primary outcomes were incomplete MR examinations due to a claustrophobic event. Follow-up was conducted 7 months after MR imaging. The primary analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat strategy.
resultsWith 33 claustrophobic events in the short-bore group (39% [95% confidence interval [CI] 28% to 50%) versus 23 in the open scanner group (26% [95% CI 18% to 37%]; P = 0.08) the difference was not significant. Patients with an event were in the examination room for 3.8 min (SD 4.4) in the short-bore and for 8.5 min (SD 7) in the open group (P = 0.004). This was due to an earlier occurrence of events in the short-bore group. The CLQ suffocation subscale was significantly associated with the occurrence of claustrophobic events (P = 0.003). New findings that explained symptoms were found in 69% of MR examinations and led to changes in medical treatment in 47% and surgery in 10% of patients. After 7 months, perceived claustrophobia increased in 32% of patients with events versus in only 11% of patients without events (P = 0.004).
conclusionsEven recent MR cannot prevent claustrophobia suggesting that further developments to create a more patient-centered MR scanner environment are needed.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00715806.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.