Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38162695›Full record

ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2024

Patient expectation and experience of MR-guided radiotherapy using a 1.5T MR-Linac.

S R de Mol van Otterloo, J M Westerhoff, T Leer, R H A Rutgers, L T C Meijers, L A Daamen, M P W Intven, H M Verkooijen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Evaluating participant experiences and tolerability with MR Linac imaging.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

S R de Mol van OtterlooDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
J M WesterhoffDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
T LeerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
R H A RutgersDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
L T C MeijersDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
L A DaamenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
M P W IntvenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA Utrecht, the Netherlands.
H M VerkooijenDivision of Imaging, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DEHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Online adaptive MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) is a relatively new form of radiotherapy treatment, delivered using a MR-Linac. It is unknown what patients expect from this treatment and whether these expectations are met. This study evaluates whether patients' pre-treatment expectations of MRgRT are met and reports patients' on-table experience on a 1.5 T MR-Linac. Materials and methods: All patients treated on the MR-Linac from November 2020 until April 2021, were eligible for inclusion. Patient expectation and experience were captured through questionnaires before, during, and three months after treatment. The on-table experience questionnaire included patient' physical and psychological coping. Patient-expected side effects, participation in daily and social activity, disease outcome and, disease related symptoms were compared to post-treatment experience. Results: We included 113 patients who were primarily male (n = 100, 89 %), with a median age of 69 years (range 52-90). For on-table experience, ninety percent of patients (strongly) agreed to feeling calm during their treatment. Six and eight percent of patients found the treatment position or bed uncomfortable respectively. Twenty-eight percent of patients felt tingling sensations during treatment. After treatment, 79 % of patients' expectations were met. Most patients experienced an (better than) expected level of side effects (75 %), participation in daily- (83 %) and social activity (86 %) and symptoms (78 %). However, 33 % expected more treatment efficacy than experienced. Conclusion: Treatment on the 1.5 T MR-Linac is well tolerated and meets patient expectations. Despite the fact that some patients expected greater treatment efficacy and the frequent occurrence of tingling sensations during treatment, most patient experiences were comparable or better than previously expected.

Indexed as

MRgRTMR-LinacPatient reported experience measures (PREM)Patient reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID38162695
PMCPMC10755768
OpenAlexW4389000702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.