ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2021
Factors that impact a patient's experience when undergoing single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) in the US: A survey of patients, imaging center staff, and physicians.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) is commonly used for coronary artery disease diagnosis/assessment in the United States (US); however, the factors that most significantly affect patients' experience when undergoing SPECT-MPI are not well known.
methodsIn this US-based cross-sectional study, an online questionnaire was used to identify and quantify attributes of the SPECT-MPI process that impact patients' experience, according to adults who underwent SPECT-MPI in the prior month, cardiac imaging center staff, and referring physicians. Participants were asked to rate the importance of 32 factors using an 11-point scale; congruence between groups (physicians vs patients, patients vs imaging center staff, and physicians vs imaging center staff) was assessed.
resultsThe survey was completed by 101 patients, 101 center staff, and 100 physicians, who gave similar ratings for the highest-rated factors (high-quality results/decreasing likelihood of having to retest, highly skilled and knowledgeable staff, and compassionate and respectful staff). Congruence was higher between patients and imaging center staff compared with physicians and patients, and was notably low between imaging center staff and physicians.
conclusionsWe identified areas for improvement in the patient SPECT-MPI experience that could translate into improved quality and value.
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.