The functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) procedure as experienced by healthy participants and stroke patients – A pilot study

BackgroundAn important aspect in functional imaging research employing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is how participants perceive the MRI scanning itself. For instance, the knowledge of how (un)comfortable MRI scanning is perceived may help institutional review boards (IRBs) or ethics committees to decide on the approval of a study, or researchers to design their experiments.MethodsWe provide empirical data from our lab gained from 70 neurologically healthy mainly student subjects and from 22 mainly elderly patients suffering from motor deficits after brain damage. All participants took part in various basic research fMRI studies using a 3T MRI scanner. Directly after the scanning, all participants completed a questionnaire assessing their experience with the fMRI procedure.Results87.2% of the healthy subjects and 77.3% of the patients rated the MRI procedure as acceptable to comfortable. In healthy subjects, males found the procedure more comfortable, while the opposite was true for patients. 12.1% of healthy subjects considered scanning durations between 30 and 60 min as too long, while no patient considered their 30 min scanning interval as too long. 93.4% of the healthy subjects would like to participate in an fMRI study again, with a significantly lower rate for the subjects who considered the scanning as too long. Further factors, such as inclusion of a diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) scan, age, and study duration had no effect on the questionnaire responses. Of the few negative comments, the main issues were noise, the restriction to keep still for the whole time, and occasional feelings of dizziness.ConclusionMRI scanning in the basic research setting is an acceptable procedure for elderly and patient participants as well as young healthy subjects.

[1]  Patient acceptance of high-field whole-body MR systems, open MR systems and dedicated MR systems for the extremities , 1997, Der Radiologe.

[2]  E. Avrahami,et al.  Panic attacks during MR imaging: treatment with i.v. diazepam. , 1990, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[3]  A. Dixon,et al.  Patients' perceptions of magnetic resonance imaging. , 1995, Clinical radiology.

[4]  André J. Szameitat,et al.  Motor imagery of complex everyday movements. An fMRI study , 2007, NeuroImage.

[5]  M. Dewey,et al.  Claustrophobia during magnetic resonance imaging: Cohort study in over 55,000 patients , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[6]  Shan Shen,et al.  VBM lesion detection depends on the normalization template: a study using simulated atrophy. , 2007, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[7]  É. Labbé,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging scanning procedures: Development of phobic response during scan and at one-month follow-up , 1990, Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

[8]  A. Sterr,et al.  A Template Effect Study on Voxel-Based Morphometry in Statistic Parametric Mapping , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.

[9]  J. Felmlee,et al.  American College of Radiology White Paper on MR Safety: 2004 update and revisions. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  R. C. Katz,et al.  Anxiety and its determinants in patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging. , 1994, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[11]  H. Cheng,et al.  Tolerance of MRI procedures by the oldest old. , 2004, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[12]  Iris Eshed,et al.  Claustrophobia and premature termination of magnetic resonance imaging examinations , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[13]  A. Lazarte,et al.  Component fears of claustrophobia associated with mock magnetic resonance imaging. , 2007, Journal of anxiety disorders.

[14]  J. Brunberg,et al.  Adult claustrophobia, anxiety and sedation in MRI. , 1997, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[15]  J. Kessler,et al.  MR imaging of claustrophobic patients in an open 1.0T scanner: motion artifacts and patient acceptability compared with closed bore magnets. , 2007, European journal of radiology.

[16]  Elna-Marie Larsson,et al.  It's like being in another world--patients' lived experience of magnetic resonance imaging. , 2006, Journal of clinical nursing.

[17]  J. Meléndez,et al.  Anxiety-related reactions associated with magnetic resonance imaging examinations. , 1993, JAMA.

[18]  Annette Sterr,et al.  Effector‐dependent activity in the left dorsal premotor cortex in motor imagery , 2007, The European journal of neuroscience.

[19]  H. Imhof,et al.  A study of the effects of patient anxiety, perceptions and equipment on motion artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging. , 1997, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[20]  B. Abdullah,et al.  Failed magnetic resonance imaging examinations due to claustrophobia. , 1998, Australasian radiology.

[21]  P. Salkovskis,et al.  Claustrophobia in MRI: the role of cognitions. , 2008, Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

[22]  S. Plein,et al.  Tolerance of MRI vs. SPECT myocardial perfusion studies—A patient survey , 2004, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[23]  Dominik Weishaupt,et al.  Low-dose intranasal versus oral midazolam for routine body MRI of claustrophobic patients , 2007, European Radiology.

[24]  M. Dewey,et al.  Subjective experiences of magnetic resonance imaging. , 1990, Clinical radiology.

[25]  S. Rachman,et al.  The Claustrophobia Questionnaire. , 2001, Journal of anxiety disorders.

[26]  K. Malisza,et al.  A Comprehensive Analysis of MRI Research Risks: In Support of Full Disclosure , 2007, Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques.

[27]  J. Flaherty,et al.  Emotional distress during magnetic resonance imaging. , 1989, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  D. Weishaupt,et al.  Multicenter trial: Comparison of two different formulations and application systems of low‐dose nasal midazolam for routine magnetic resonance imaging of claustrophobic patients , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.