Patient-Reported Experience and Preferences with Long–Axial-Field-of-View and Total-Body PET/CT: A Prospective, Multicenter Cross-Sectional Survey

Total-body and long–axial-field-of-view PET/CT scanners differ in geometry, scan capability, and access requirements. Understanding patient preferences is essential for protocol design and service planning. Methods: Patients undergoing PET/CT at 3 centers across 3 scanner types completed a structured survey covering scanner perception, physical comfort, claustrophobia, scan duration tolerance, radiation dose and image quality preferences, and travel/access priorities. Group differences were assessed using the Fisher–Freeman–Halton exact test with Cramér φ for effect size. Results: In total, 227 patients completed the survey. Scans were well-tolerated overall, with 96% of respondents reporting no or only minor discomfort. Claustrophobia was uncommon, and neither discomfort (P = 0.07–0.99) nor claustrophobia (P = 0.40–0.75) differed significantly by scanner type or location. When asked how to best tailor protocols, patients strongly prioritized diagnostic image quality; 79% preferred a better-quality scan achieved through longer scan times or a balanced time–dose approach, with only 2% willing to accept lower but acceptable image quality under any circumstance (P < 0.001 by location, φ = 0.29). Most patients (80%) were willing to wait more than 60 min after injection to improve image quality, but this varied significantly by site (P < 0.001, φ = 0.39). Willingness to undergo prolonged dynamic imaging of up to 70 min was expressed by 49% of respondents. Access preferences varied significantly by location (P < 0.001, φ = 0.28), with most patients limiting acceptable travel to 1–3 h and site familiarity being the primary reason for preferring a local center rather than access to higher-quality scanning in a specialized center. Conclusion: PET/CT imaging was well-tolerated across all scanner types. No major discomfort or claustrophobia was encountered with total-body and long–axial-field-of-view PET/CT. Patients valued diagnostic image quality highly and were generally willing to undergo delayed imaging but not scans of longer durations.