Abstract
With the rise in numbers of people living with dementia and new disease modifying therapies entering the market, there is increasing need for brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for diagnosis and safety monitoring. The number of scans that need reporting is expected to rapidly grow. Clinical radiology reports are currently largely qualitative and variable in structure and content. By contrast, research software typically uses automated methods to extract quantitative metrics from brain scans.
To better understand the unmet clinical need for brain reporting software for dementia we conducted a barrier to adoption study using the Lean Assessment Process (LAP)methodology. We first assessed the role of brain imaging in the diagnostic pathway for people with suspected dementia in the NHS in England. We then explored the views of (neuro)radiologists, neurologists and psychiatrists on the potential benefits and level of acceptance of software to support brain MRI analysis, using the FMRIB software library (FSL) as a technology exemplar.
The main perceived utilities of the proposed software were: increased diagnostic confidence; support for delivery of disease modifying therapies; and the possibility to compare individual results with population norms. In addition to assessment of global atrophy, hippocampal atrophy and white matter hyperintensities, additional user requirements included assessment of microbleeds, segmentation of multiple brain structures, clear information about the control population used for reference, and possibility to compare multiple scans. The main barriers to adoption related to the limited availability of 3T MRI scanners in the UK, integration into the clinical workflow, and the need to demonstrate cost-effectiveness. These findings will guide future technical development, clinical validation, and health economic evaluation.
Competing Interest Statement
SS and LG receive royalties from licensing of FSL to non-academic, commercial parties. SS is part-owner of a neuroimaging analysis company SBGneuro. The remaining authors report no potential conflicts of interest.
Funding Statement
This project was supported by the Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging (203139/Z/16/Z, 203139/A/16/Z and 215573/Z/19/Z) and by the NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR203316). LG was also supported by an Alzheimer's Association Grant (AARF-21-846366). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The project was conducted by Health Innovation Oxford and Thames Valley, hosted by Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. This work does not require approval from an NHS Research Ethics Committee, according to the following criteria: participants in the study were not randomised to different groups, the study does not demand changing treatment/patient care from accepted standards, and the findings are not going to be generalisable.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Anonymised data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors for non-commercial purposes.
