Advertisement

Impact on child and parent anxiety level of a teddy bear-scale mock magnetic resonance scanner

  • Baptiste MorelEmail author
  • Frederic Andersson
  • Muriel Samalbide
  • Gauthier Binninger
  • Elodie Carpentier
  • Dominique Sirinelli
  • Jean-Philippe Cottier
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Pediatric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be stressful. Mock MR scanners have been proven to be effective in avoiding the use of general anesthesia.

Objectives

We prospectively evaluated the impact of a teddy bear-scale model of a mock MR scanner on the anxiety experienced by parents and their children during MRI without general anesthesia .

Materials and methods

A 1-year prospective study before and after the installation of a mock scanner in a Pediatric Radiology Department of a university hospital. Anxiety levels were self-estimated by children ages 4 to 16 years and by the parents with a visual analogue scale (from 0, completely relaxed, to 100, extremely stressed) at three moments: in the waiting room, in the preparation room after an explanation by the MRI technologists, and at the issue of the MR acquisition images. Two groups were tested: one with a mock MR scanner, the other without. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher exact tests were performed. Motion artifacts were studied.

Results

Ninety-one children and their parents were included. The median age was 8 years (standard deviation [SD]=2). In the post mock period, the ambiance of the preparation room was considered by children as significantly more relaxing in 50% vs. 20% (P=0.004) and the anxiety level of children was significantly lower after the explanation, particularly in girls, but unchanged for their parents. The anxiety levels at the end of the examination were significantly lower for parents. The motion artifacts rate was lower (1.7% vs. 4.7%, P=0.04).

Conclusion

A mock scanner was an efficient tool to improve efficiency of the explanation and to decrease anxiety in children and motion artifacts in pediatric MRI.

Keywords

Anxiety Children Magnetic resonance imaging Mock scanner Motion artifacts 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the participating children and their families, all the MRI technologists at Tours University Hospital Center and Elodie Gaspard. We are especially grateful to Elodie Semelier and Marie Claude Santini from the Pharmavie Association and Laura Elharrar.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None

References

  1. 1.
    Tyc VL, Fairclough D, Fletcher B et al (1995) Children’s distress during magnetic resonance imaging procedures. Child Health Care 24:5–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marshall SP, Smith MS, Weinberger E (1995) Perceived anxiety of pediatric patients to magnetic resonance. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 34:59–60Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists (2002) practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology 96:1004–1017Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sury M, Bullock I, Rabar S et al (2010) Sedation for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in children and young people: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ 341:c6819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cejda KR, Smeltzer MP, Hansbury EN et al (2012) The impact of preparation and support procedures for children with sickle cell disease undergoing MRI. Pediatr Radiol 42:1223–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cahoon GD, Davison TE (2014) Prediction of compliance with MRI procedures among children of ages 3 years to 12 years. Pediatr Radiol 44:1302–1309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cravero JP, Beach ML, Blike GT et al (2009) The incidence and nature of adverse events during pediatric sedation/anesthesia with propofol for procedures outside the operating room: a report from the pediatric sedation research consortium. Anesth Analg 108:795–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sanborn PA, Michna E, Zurakowski D et al (2005) Adverse cardiovascular and respiratory events during sedation of pediatric patients for imaging examinations. Radiology 237:288–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edwards AD, Arthurs OJ (2011) Paediatric MRI under sedation: is it necessary? What is the evidence for the alternatives? Pediatr Radiol 41:1353–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bratton SC, Ray D, Rhine T, Jones L (2005) The efficacy of play therapy with children: a meta-analytic review of treatment outcomes. Prof Psychol Res Pract 36:376–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Russell C, Smart S (2007) Guided imagery and distraction therapy in paediatric hospice care. Paediatr Nurs 19:24–26Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartman JH, Bena J, McIntyre S, Albert NM (2009) Does a photo diary decrease stress and anxiety in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging? A randomized, controlled study. J Radiol Nurs 28:122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tyc VL, Leigh L, Mulhern RK et al (1997) Evaluation of a cognitive-behavioral intervention for reducing distress in pediatric cancer patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging procedures. Int J Rehabil Health 3:267–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hallowell LM, Stewart SE, de Amorim E et al (2008) Reviewing the process of preparing children for MRI. Pediatr Radiol 38:271–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Bie HMA, Boersma M, Wattjes MP et al (2010) Preparing children with a mock scanner training protocol results in high quality structural and functional MRI scans. Eur J Pediatr 169:1079–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carter AJ, Greer ML, Gray SE, Ware RS (2010) Mock MRI: reducing the need for anaesthesia in children. Pediatr Radiol 40:1368–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    R Foundation (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria; 2014. http://www.r-project.org (Accessed 7 August 2019)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pediatric Radiology DepartmentClocheville University HospitalToursFrance
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineFrancois Rabelais UniversityToursFrance
  3. 3.UMR 1253, iBrainUniversité de ToursToursFrance
  4. 4.Neuroradiology DepartmentBretonneau HospitalToursFrance

Personalised recommendations