Abstract
Objectives
Little is known about the psychosocial impact and subjective interpretation of communicated incide ntal findings from whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (wb-MRI). This was addressed with this general population study.
Methods
Data was based on the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP), Germany. SHIP comprised a 1.5-T wb-MRI examination. A postal survey was conducted among the first 471 participants, aged 23–84 years, who received a notification about incidental findings (response 86.0 %, n = 405). The severity of incidental findings was assessed from the participants’ and radiologists’ perspective.
Results
In total, 394 participants (97.3 %) wanted to learn about their health by undergoing wb-MRI. Strong distress while waiting for a potential notification of an incidental finding was reported by 40 participants (9.9 %), whereas 116 (28.6 %) reported moderate to severe psychological distress thereafter. Strong disagreement was noted between the subjective and radiological evaluation of the findings’ severity (kappa = 0.02). Almost all participants (n = 389, 96.0 %) were very satisfied with their examination.
Conclusions
Despite the high satisfaction of most participants, there were numerous adverse consequences concerning the communication of incidental findings and false expectations about the likely potential benefits of whole-body-MRI.
Key Points
• Disclosed incidental findings from MRI may lead to substantial psychosocial distress.
• Subjective and radiological evaluations of incidental findings’ severity differ strongly.
• Disclosing incidental findings is strongly endorsed by study volunteers.
• Study volunteers tend to have false expectations about potential benefits from MRI.
• Minimizing stress in study volunteers should be a key aim in MRI research.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- SHIP:
-
Study of Health in Pomerania
- wb-MRI:
-
whole-body MRI
References
Katzman GL, Dagher AP, Patronas NJ (1999) Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging from 1000 asymptomatic volunteers. JAMA 282:36–39
Hofman A, Breteler MM, van Duijn CM et al (2009) The Rotterdam Study: 2010 objectives and design update. Eur J Epidemiol 24:553–572
Jefferson AL, Himali JJ, Beiser AS et al (2010) Cardiac index is associated with brain aging: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 122:690–697
Qiu C, Cotch MF, Sigurdsson S et al (2010) Cerebral microbleeds, retinopathy, and dementia: the AGES-Reykjavik Study. Neurology 75:2221–2228
Turkbey EB, McClelland RL, Kronmal RA et al (2010) The impact of obesity on the left ventricle: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:266–274
Vernooij MW, Ikram MA, Tanghe HL et al (2007) Incidental findings on brain MRI in the general population. N Engl J Med 357:1821–1828
Volzke H, Alte D, Schmidt CO et al (2011) Cohort profile: the Study of Health in Pomerania. Int J Epidemiol 40:294–307
Borra RJ, Sorensen AG (2011) Incidental findings in brain MRI research: what do we owe our subjects? J Am Coll Radiol 8:848–852
Hegenscheid K, Kuhn JP, Volzke H, Biffar R, Hosten N, Puls R (2009) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging of healthy volunteers: pilot study results from the population-based SHIP study. Rofo 181:748–759
Illes J (2008) Brain screening and incidental findings: flocking to folly? Lancet Neurol 7:23–24
Illes J, Kirschen MP, Edwards E et al (2006) Ethics. Incidental findings in brain imaging research. Science 311:783–784
Rinaldi P, Costantini M, Belli P et al (2011) Extra-mammary findings in breast MRI. Eur Radiol 21:2268–2276
Royal JM, Peterson BS (2008) The risks and benefits of searching for incidental findings in MRI research scans. J Law Med Ethics 36:305–314, 212
Shoemaker JM, Holdsworth MT, Aine C et al (2011) A practical approach to incidental findings in neuroimaging research. Neurology 77:2123–2127
Woodward CI, Toms AP (2009) Incidental findings in “normal” volunteers. Clin Radiol 64:951–953
Wyttenbach R, Medioni N, Santini P, Vock P, Szucs-Farkas Z (2012) Extracardiac findings detected by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 22:1295–1302
Morin SH, Cobbold JF, Lim AK et al (2009) Incidental findings in healthy control research subjects using whole-body MRI. Eur J Radiol 72:529–533
Hegenscheid K, Seipel R, Schmidt CO et al (2012) Potentially relevant incidental findings on research whole-body MRI in the general adult population: frequencies and management. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2636-6
Langanke M, Erdmann P (2011) [MRI as a scientific examination and the problem of communicating incidental findings, ethical challenges regarding study volunteers] Tragfähige Rede von Gott, Festgabe für Heinrich Assel zum 50. Geburtstag am 9. February 2011. Dr. Kovač, Hamburg, pp 197–240
Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA et al (2008) Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 36:219–248
Booth TC, Waldman AD, Wardlaw JM, Taylor SA, Jackson A (2012) Management of incidental findings during imaging research in “healthy” volunteers: current UK practice. Br J Radiol 85:11–21
Illes J, Kirschen MP, Edwards E et al (2008) Practical approaches to incidental findings in brain imaging research. Neurology 70:384–390
Langanke M, Brothers KB, Erdmann P et al (2011) Comparing different scientific approaches to personalized medicine: research ethics and privacy protection. Per Med 8:437–444
Heinemann T, Hoppe C, Weber B, Elger CE (2009) Ethically appropriate handling of incidental findings in human neuroimaging research: letter to the guest editorial of Frank Hentschel and Rudiger von Kummer. Klin Neuroradiol 19:242–243
Kirschen MP, Jaworska A, Illes J (2006) Subjects’ expectations in neuroimaging research. J Magn Reson Imaging 23:205–209
Illes J, Kirschen MP, Karetsky K et al (2004) Discovery and disclosure of incidental findings in neuroimaging research. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:743–747
Royston P, Sauerbrei W (2008) Multivariable model-building: a pragmatic approach to regression analysis based on fractional polynomials for modelling continuous variables. Wiley, Chichester
Appelbaum PS, Lidz CW, Grisso T (2004) Therapeutic misconception in clinical research: frequency and risk factors. IRB 26:1–8
Kumra S, Ashtari M, Anderson B, Cervellione KL, Kan L (2006) Ethical and practical considerations in the management of incidental findings in pediatric MRI studies. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 45:1000–1006
Andrasik F, Flor H, Turk DC (2005) An expanded view of psychological aspects in head pain: the biopsychosocial model. Neurol Sci 26:s87–s91
McCarney R, Warner J, Iliffe S, van Haselen R, Griffin M, Fisher P (2007) The Hawthorne effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 7:30
Acknowledgements
SHIP is part of the Community Medicine Research net of the University of Greifswald, Germany, which is funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (grant no. 03ZIK012), the Ministry of Cultural Affairs as well as the Social Ministry of the Federal State of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania. Whole-body MR imaging was supported by a joint grant from Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany and the Federal State of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. The University of Greifswald is a member of the ‘Center of Knowledge Interchange’ program of the Siemens AG. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR mammography research is part of the entire whole-body MRI study and was supported by Bayer Healthcare. The work was further supported by the DFG (grant no. SCHM 2744/1-1).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schmidt, C.O., Hegenscheid, K., Erdmann, P. et al. Psychosocial consequences and severity of disclosed incidental findings from whole-body MRI in a general population study. Eur Radiol 23, 1343–1351 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2723-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2723-8