Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Maximiliansplatz 1, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
J Digit Imaging. 2013 Jun;26(3):383-92. doi: 10.1007/s10278-012-9560-9.
To evaluate the feasibility of an iPad-based documented patient briefing for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) examinations. A standard briefing sheet and questionnaire for a MRI scan was converted from paper form into an iPad application. Twenty patients, who had been referred for an MRI scan, were briefed about the examination in paper form as well as via the iPad application before performing the MRI scan. Time each patient needed for the briefing and the number of questions that came up were documented. Patients' acceptance of the electronic briefing was assessed using a questionnaire. The mean processing time was 2.36 min (range 0.58 to 09.35 min., standard deviation ±2.05 min) for the paper-based briefing and 4.15 min (range 1.56 to 13.48 min, SD ± 2.36 min) for the app-based briefing. Concerning technical aspects, patients asked two questions during the app-based briefing; no questions arose during the paper-based briefing. Six patients preferred electronic briefing and four patients, the paper-based form. No patient preferred the electronic form with additional multimedial information. Eight participants did not mind which briefing version was used; two participants did not express their preference at all. Our experiences showed that electronic briefing using an iPad is feasible and has the potential to become a user-friendly alternative to the conventional paper-based approach. Owing to the broad range of the results, a follow-up study will seek to determine the influencing factors on processing time and other potential questions.
评估基于 iPad 的磁共振成像(MRI)检查患者记录式简报的可行性。将 MRI 扫描的标准简报表和问卷从纸质形式转换为 iPad 应用程序。对 20 名已被转介进行 MRI 扫描的患者,在进行 MRI 扫描之前,分别以纸质形式和 iPad 应用程序形式进行检查简报。记录每位患者接受简报所需的时间和提出的问题数量。使用问卷评估患者对电子简报的接受程度。基于纸质形式的简报平均处理时间为 2.36 分钟(范围 0.58 至 09.35 分钟,标准差 ±2.05 分钟),基于应用程序形式的简报平均处理时间为 4.15 分钟(范围 1.56 至 13.48 分钟,标准差 ±2.36 分钟)。关于技术方面,患者在基于应用程序的简报中提出了两个问题;在基于纸质的简报中没有提出任何问题。六名患者更喜欢电子简报,四名患者更喜欢纸质形式。没有患者喜欢带有额外多媒体信息的电子表格。八名参与者不介意使用哪种简报版本;两名参与者根本没有表达他们的偏好。我们的经验表明,使用 iPad 进行电子简报是可行的,并且有可能成为传统纸质方法的用户友好替代方案。由于结果范围广泛,后续研究将旨在确定处理时间和其他潜在问题的影响因素。