Mirror Mirror on the Wall: The Patients’ View

Abstract

If you were a kid in the 1940s and 1950s and your parents really loved you, they took you to Mr. Glynn’s shoe store where you could stick your feet in a box and examine them in the ghostly light of a flouroscope. And if you were a good customer (quiet, cooperative, and calm), Mr. Glynn would let you stop off on the way home from Liberty Street School for an extra peek. This initial experience with a radiologist’s toolbox highlights many of the issues which consumers still assume: If it doesn’t hurt, it’s safe If it’s used routinely and often, it’s safe All X-ray, CT, and MRI machines are created equal All machines are accessible to everyone Turns out, those fluoroscopes in shoe stores were not such a good idea [1]. And subsequent events have shown that the rest of those assumptions are also questionable. This paper, written from the patient perspective, outlines both the promise of imaging for well-informed patients as well as documenting the dangers that arise when patients receive incomplete, biased, or inaccurate reports of radiologic findings, or when adequate technology is not available. Cases from one community demonstrate how the public learns and forms opinions about radiology facilities within their own communities. Suggestions on more efficient use of imaging reports and enhanced patient access to imaging reports are offered in the concluding section of the paper. Recommendations to increase public awareness of local imaging facilities are included.