Patient’s Comfort and Technical Quality Exams at 1.5 and 3.0 T Magnetic Resonance Imaging

HTML  XML Download Download as PDF (Size: 324KB)  PP. 264-274  
DOI: 10.4236/ojrad.2016.64035    1,491 Downloads   3,602 Views  Citations

ABSTRACT

Increased interest of clinicians for using 3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as imaging modality of choice for their patients, has been evident in the past few years. The aim of this study was to compare the technical quality of the obtained tomography using 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI, and to compare the subjective feeling of discomfort of patients and subjective acoustic noise experience during imaging using MRI at 3.0 T and 1.5 T. Brain MRI (1.5 and 3.0 T) was performed in 58 patients, according to a standardized protocol. All studies have been randomly described by independent two radiologists. The reference standard for the existence of technical artifact is established on the basis of both radiologists’ consensus. We also compared the subjective feelings of the discomfort and acoustic noise during the both MRI (1.5 T and 3.0 T) exams. Artifacts were significantly more common during 3.0 T MRI in comparison with the 1.5 T MRI (χ2 = 5.286, P < 0.05), as well as in male patients (χ2 = 8.841, P < 0.05), and sub-jective assessments of discomfort and acoustic noise were higher in patients who underwent imaging using 3.0 T MRI, (χ2 = 125.959, df = 1, P < 0.001) and in females (χ2 = 195.449, df = 1, P < 0.001). Additional research is needed to prove that appropriate information for patients about the discomfort during 3.0 T MRI and their psychological preparation is very important element for optimal use of 3.0 T MRI in daily clinical practice.

Share and Cite:

Vujmilović, S. , Vujnović, S. , Kovačević-Dragosavljević, V. , Vujković, Z. , Katana, D. and Grujić-Vujmilović, D. (2016) Patient’s Comfort and Technical Quality Exams at 1.5 and 3.0 T Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Open Journal of Radiology, 6, 264-274. doi: 10.4236/ojrad.2016.64035.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.