Impact of sensory design interventions on image quality, patient anxiety and overall patient experience at MRI.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess the effect of sensory stimulation on patient MRI experience and to assess whether sensory stimulation has a significant effect on MR image quality.


METHODS
A case-control study was conducted over 4 months, involving patients undergoing MRI brain, cervical spine, breast and prostate. The study involved 106 patients, 64 cases and 42 controls. Cases underwent sensory stimulation during the scan in the form of a scented cotton pad placed in the scanner near their head and/or calming bird noises were played over headphones. Post-scan, participants completed a questionnaire regarding their experience of MRI. Scanning radiographers completed a questionnaire regarding patient tolerance of the scan. All studies were evaluated by two radiologists for the presence of movement artefact.


RESULTS
39% of cases and 38% of controls reported anxiety in the days preceding MRI. 6.2% of cases required coaching during image acquisition, while 9.7% of controls required coaching. 4.7% of cases and 4.8% controls required sequence repetition owing to movement artefact. Mean patient experience score (as graded by the patient) for controls was 1.74 ± 0.63 standard deviation (SD) and for cases, it was 1.67 ± 0.60 SD. (Lower assigned scores equated to a better experience). Mean patient experience score based on comments on a 5-point scale as graded by two observers was 2.81 ± 0.70 SD for controls, 2.42 + 0.94 SD for sound intervention and 2.46 ± 1.01 SD for scent intervention. Mean motion artefact score graded by the two radiologists was 1.13 ± 0.53 SD for controls and 1.08 ± 0.36 SD for cases. (A lower score equated to less movement artefact). We demonstrated a trend towards a relaxing experience in those patients undergoing MRI for the first time who underwent sensory intervention. Participant positive ratings of the smell pleasantness were associated with a reduced likelihood of experiencing anxiety (p = 0.13). Results were not statistically significant.


CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrated a subjectively improved experience of MRI for some patients with the intervention of sound and smell. The study failed to show a significant decrease in patient movement during MRI investigations. This may relate to the small study size and a low level of patient movement in the case group. Advances in knowledge: Sound and olfactory sensory environment interventions at MRI can improve the patient experience. These low-cost interventions are well tolerated, may improve acceptance of MRI in patients with anxiety and offer a competitive advantage to imaging centres.
1 Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Emma
E
Stanley
1 Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Andrea
A
Cradock
2 Department of Radiology, Mater Private Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
James
J
Bisset
1 Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Ciara
C
McEntee
1 Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.|2 Department of Radiology, Mater Private Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Martin J
MJ
O'Connell
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001007:Anxiety / Q000209:etiology* / Q000517:prevention & control*; D016477:Artifacts; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009622:Noise; D009812:Odorants; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires