Parental Knowledge of Potential Cancer Risks From Exposure to Computed Tomography

Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, and.
PEDIATRICS (Impact Factor: 5.3). 07/2013; 132(2). DOI: 10.1542/peds.2013-0378
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE:Computed tomography (CT) imaging of children is increasing in emergent settings without an understanding of parental knowledge of potential cancer risks. In children with head injuries, our primary objective was to determine the proportion of parents who were aware of the potential of CT to increase a child's lifetime risk of malignancy. We also examined willingness to proceed with recommended CT after risk disclosure and preference to be informed of potential risks.METHODS:This was a prospective cross-sectional survey of parents whose children presented to a tertiary care pediatric emergency department with a head injury. Survey questions were derived and validated by using expert opinion, available literature, and pre- and pilot testing of questions with the target audience.RESULTS:Of the 742 enrolled parents, 454 (61.2%) were female and 594 (80.0%) were aged 31 to 50 years. Importantly, 357 (46.8%) were aware of the potential for an increased lifetime malignancy risk from CT. Before risk estimate provision, the proportion of parents "very willing/willing" to proceed with head CT was 90.4%; after disclosure, willingness decreased to 69.6% (P < .0001), and 42 (5.6%) would refuse the CT. Of note, 673 (90.3%) wished to be informed of potential malignancy risks.CONCLUSIONS:Approximately half of the participating parents were aware of the potential increased lifetime malignancy risk associated with head CT imaging. Willingness to proceed with CT testing was reduced after risk disclosure but was a significant barrier for a small minority of parents. Most parents wanted to be informed of potential malignancy risks before proceeding with imaging.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The risk of ionizing radiation from diagnostic imaging has been a popular topic in the radiology literature and lay press. Communicating the magnitude of risk to patients and caregivers is problematic because of the uncertainty in estimates derived principally from epidemiological studies of large populations, and alternative approaches are needed to provide a scientific basis for personalized risk estimates. The underlying patient disease and life expectancy greatly influence risk projections. Research into the biological mechanisms of radiation-induced DNA damage and repair challenges the linear no-threshold dose-response assumption and reveals that individuals vary in sensitivity to radiation. Studies of decision-making psychology show that individuals are highly susceptible to irrational biases when judging risks. Truly informed medical decision-making that respects patient autonomy requires appropriate framing of radiation risks in perspective with other risks and with the benefits of imaging. To follow the principles of personalized medicine and treat patients according to their specific phenotypic and personality profiles, diagnostic imaging should optimally be tailored not only to patient size, body region and clinical indication, but also to underlying disease conditions, radio-sensitivity and risk perception and preferences that vary among individuals.
    Pediatric Radiology 10/2014; 44(Supplement 3):444-449. DOI:10.1007/s00247-014-3037-6 · 1.65 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In order to personalize the communication of the CT risk, we need to describe the risk in the context of the clinical benefit of CT, which will generally be much higher, provided a CT scan has a well-established clinical indication. However as pediatric radiologists we should be careful not to overstate the benefit of CT, being aware that medico-legal pressures and the realities of health care economics have led to overutilization of the technology. And even though we should not use previously accumulated radiation dose to a child as an argument against conducting a clinically indicated scan (the "sunk-cost" bias), we should consider patients' radiation history in the diagnostic decision process. As a contribution to future public health, it makes more sense to look for non-radiating alternatives to CT in the much larger group of basically healthy children who are receiving occasional scans for widely prevalent conditions such as appendicitis and trauma than to attempt lowering CT use in the smaller group of patients with chronic conditions with a limited life expectancy. When communicating the CT risk with individual patients and their parents, we should acknowledge and address their concerns within the framework of informed decision-making. When appropriate, we may express the individual radiation risk, based on estimates of summated absorbed organ dose, as an order of magnitude rather than as an absolute number, and compare this with the much larger natural cancer incidence over a child's lifetime, and with other risks in medicine and daily life. We should anticipate that many patients cannot make informed decisions on their own in this complex matter, and we should offer our guidance while maintaining respect for patient autonomy. Proper documentation of the informed decision process is important for future reference. In concert with our referring physicians, pediatric radiologists are well-equipped to tackle the complexities associated with the communication of CT risk, a task that often falls upon us, and by becoming more involved in the diagnostic decision process we can add value to the health care system.
    Pediatric Radiology 10/2014; 44(Supplement 3):525-533. DOI:10.1007/s00247-014-3087-9 · 1.65 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The outcomes of patients admitted to the hospital following a sport-related concussion are largely unknown. Medical records of patients admitted to the pediatric trauma service between 2008 and 2011 after sustaining a sport-related concussion were reviewed. In all, 59 participants were in the high-velocity activities group, and 21 in the field or court sport group. Abnormal CT scans were found in 14 patients in the high-velocity group and 2 in the field or court sport group. The majority of participants in the field or court sport group were football players, all of whom had normal CT scans. Headache was predictive of an abnormal CT scan. Among the patients, 56% clinically improved and were discharged the following day. Patients with field or court sport-related concussion admitted to a pediatric trauma service appear to be at low risk for clinically significant intracranial pathology and do well in the acute setting.
    Clinical Pediatrics 05/2014; 53(8). DOI:10.1177/0009922814533403 · 1.26 Impact Factor


Available from
Jun 1, 2014