Readability of Spanish-Language Patient Education Materials From RadiologyInfo.org

PurposeReadability of patient education materials has been linked to health outcomes, and reports on patient education materials in radiology have demonstrated readability levels higher than recommended. Few studies in radiology, however, have assessed patient comprehension of Spanish-language health care educational materials. The purpose of this study was thus to assess the readability of patient education materials written in Spanish from RadiologyInfo.org.MethodsAll patient education materials written in Spanish available in July 2017 from the RadiologyInfo.org patient education library were compiled into a database over a 1-day period. After modification and editing to minimize artificial changes in readability levels, four readability scales were used to assess the texts: the Gilliam-Peña-Mountain scale, the Läsbarhets formula, the rate index formula, and the SOL formula. Readability was compared among scales using analysis of variance, and inter- and intrarater variability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients.ResultsIn total, 134 patient education articles written in Spanish were included from the RadiologyInfo.org patient education library. The mean readability grade level was the 10th grade reading level or higher for all scales (average, 12th grade); only one article was written below the 8th grade level. There was no significant difference in readability level on the basis of readability scale used.ConclusionsSpanish-language patient educational materials provided at the RadiologyInfo.org website are written at levels too high for the average patient. Future efforts should be made to improve the readability of these patient education materials for English and Spanish speakers alike.     

From the Reading Room to the Courtroom—The Use of Molecular Radionuclide Imaging in Criminal Trials

Recent years have witnessed an expanded use of single-photon emission CT and PET for a wide range of clinical applications, including imaging of brain abnormalities. As a result, molecular brain imaging is now being more extensively utilized in criminal cases, in particular in the sentencing phase of a trial. This perspective aims to provide a brief overview for the practicing radiologist of this expanded use of single-photon emission CT and PET in criminal cases and will discuss the role of radiology in this field.     

“Worst Headache of Life” in a Migraineur: Marginal Value of Emergency Department CT Scanning

PurposeThe ACR Appropriateness Criteria recommend performing noncontrast head CT (NCCT) for patients with sudden severe headache (“worst headache of life” [WHOL] or “thunderclap headache” [TCH]). The aim of this study was to assess the value of NCCT scanning in patients with known migraine histories and WHOL or TCH. The hypothesis was that there would be little utility in performing emergency department (ED) NCCT scans in migraineurs without other red flags, even if they had WHOL or TCH.MethodsThe ED NCCT scans of all patients reporting WHOL or TCH who had established diagnoses of migraine were retrospectively reviewed over a 5-year period. Patients without known intracranial pathology, cancer, or immunocompromising disease or recent head trauma were included as the main study group. For comparison, patients with any of those factors were included as the comparison group. Scans were graded as (1) normal, (2) minor unimportant findings, (3) findings requiring intervention or follow-up, or (4) critical.ResultsTwo hundred twenty-four patients with the chief symptom of WHOL or TCH and a history of migraine who underwent ED NCCT were studied. In the main study group, no patients had grade 4 imaging findings (0%), one had a false-positive grade 3 finding (0.8%), and there were no cases of subarachnoid hemorrhage (0%). In the comparison group, six patients had grade 4 imaging findings (6.5%) and three had grade 3 findings (3.3%).ConclusionsNCCT in known migraineurs with WHOL or TCH who do not have intracranial pathology, cancer, immunocompromising disease, or recent head trauma yielded no critical findings. Therefore, the value of scanning these patients is questionable.