PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Natalie Tyldesley-Marshall
AU  - Sheila Greenfield
AU  - Susan Neilson
AU  - Martin English
AU  - Jenny Adamski
AU  - Andrew Peet
TI  - Qualitative study: patients’ and parents’ views on brain tumour MRIs
AID  - 10.1136/archdischild-2019-317306
DP  - 2020 Feb 01
TA  - Archives of Disease in Childhood
PG  - 166--172
VI  - 105
IP  - 2
4099  - http://adc.bmj.com/content/105/2/166.short
4100  - http://adc.bmj.com/content/105/2/166.full
SO  - Arch Dis Child2020 Feb 01; 105
AB  - Background MRI is essential to the clinical management of children and young people with brain tumours. Advances in technology have made images more complicated to interpret, yet more easily available digitally. It is common practice to show these to patients and families, but how they emotionally respond to, understand and value, seeing brain tumour MRIs has not been formally studied.Methods Qualitative semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 14 families (8 patients, 15 parents) purposively sampled from paediatric patients (0 to 18 years) attending a large UK children’s hospital for treatment or monitoring of a brain tumour. Transcripts were analysed thematically using the Framework Method.Results Four themes were identified: Receiving results (waiting for results, getting results back, preferences to see images), Emotional responses to MRIs, Understanding of images (what they can show, what they cannot show, confusion) and Value of MRIs (aesthetics, aiding understanding, contextualised knowledge/emotional benefits, enhanced control, enhanced working relationships, no value). All families found value in seeing MRIs, including reassurance, hope, improved understanding and enhanced feeling of control over the condition. However emotional responses varied enormously.Conclusions Clinical teams should always explain MRIs after ‘framing’ the information. This should minimise participant confusion around meaning, periodically evident even after many years. Patient and parent preferences for being shown MRIs varied, and often changed over time, therefore clinicians should identify, record and update these preferences. Time between scanning and receiving the result was stressful causing ‘scanxiety’, but most prioritised accuracy over speed of receiving results.