JOURNAL CLUB: Patient Perception of Radiology and Radiologists: A Survey Analysis of Academic and Community Institutions.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study is to evaluate patient understanding of radiology and radiologists and to assess patient interest in direct consultation with a radiologist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1976 adult radiology outpatients at both a university and a nearby community hospital were surveyed. After an initial survey was administered, educational material with an attached follow-up survey was distributed to the patients. A McNemar test was used to assess the difference between patients who correctly chose the radiologist as the image interpreter before and after educational material was provided, whereas a paired t test was used to test the difference between patient levels of comfort with various image interpreters.

RESULTS: Of the respondents, 84% expressed interest in meeting with a radiologist, with 43% willing to pay $0, 37% willing to pay $10-$30, and 20% willing to pay $40 or more to do so. Small percentages of respondents incorrectly identified ultrasound (10%) and MRI (45%) examinations as using radiation, whereas larger percentages of respondents correctly identified radiography (87%), CT (63%), and nuclear medicine imaging (62%) examinations as using radiation. A total of 73% of respondents (1002/1369) initially chose the radiologist as the image interpreter; this percentage improved to 81% (1109/1369) after the respondents received educational material (p < 0.0001). Both before and after educational material was provided, respondents had a statistically significantly lower mean (± SD) comfort level score (scale, 1-10) when faced with the prospect of a nurse or physician assistant interpreting their examination versus a trained physician (i.e., a radiologist) (mean score, 5.2 ± 3.27 and 9.4 ± 1.47, respectively, before education [p < 0.0001] and 5.2 ± 2.94 and 9.56 ± 1.24, respectively, after education [p < 0.0001]).

CONCLUSION: The level of comfort with radiologists as image interpreters was statistically significantly higher than the level of comfort with nonradiologist interpreters, and most patients were interested in meeting with radiologists. Educational material improved patient perception and knowledge of radiology.