4.3 Article

Easing anxiety in preparation for pediatric magnetic resonance imaging: a pilot study using animal-assisted therapy

期刊

PEDIATRIC RADIOLOGY
卷 49, 期 8, 页码 1000-1009

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00247-019-04407-3

关键词

Animal-assisted therapy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Pediatric; Sedation alternatives

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundChildren undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can experience negative emotions both before and during their scan, causing them to move and often necessitating the use of procedural sedation. Several strategies to improve patient compliance have been attempted.ObjectiveThis study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a non-pharmacological intervention to reduce anxiety in pediatric patients preparing for MRI using animal-assisted therapy.Materials and methodsAn animal intervention pilot study was performed in patients who agreed in advance to interact with a dog. Patients and caregivers filled out questionnaires, including questions designed to capture changes in patient emotion before and after the intervention. MRI diagnostic quality was compared to age- and gender-matched control groups with and without general anesthesia.ResultsThe intervention in 21 patients comparing pre- and post-scan surveys demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in patient anxiety levels (P<0.01). Diagnostic MRI scans were achieved in 19/21 (90%), with no significant difference in exam quality or times compared against control groups. The majority of caregivers and staff members agreed strongly that patients benefited from the therapy dog's presence.ConclusionThe use of animal-assisted therapy in a pilot group in our MRI division resulted in a beneficial effect on patients' emotional status, easing anxiety in preparation for scheduled scans, without impacting MRI quality or duration. Further randomized studies will be needed to demonstrate its significance in reducing sedation rates in children undergoing MRI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据