Literature DB >> 15618376

Screening mammography: costs and use of screening-related services.

Steven P Poplack1, Patricia A Carney, Julia E Weiss, Linda Titus-Ernstoff, Martha E Goodrich, Anna N A Tosteson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the costs and screening-related services in women undergoing screening mammography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study procedures were approved by the institutional committee for the protection of human subjects, and participants gave prior written consent. Data from a statewide mammography registry were used to identify imaging examinations, clinical consultations, interventional procedures, and pathology reports associated with screening mammography. The analysis included 99 064 women in the New Hampshire Mammography Network who underwent screening mammography between November 1, 1996, and March 31, 2000. Use of screening-related services in each case was tracked over an 18-month period, and procedure-specific national Medicare reimbursement rates from 2002 were applied for estimation of costs. Descriptive statistics (means, medians, standard deviations, 95% confidence intervals, frequencies, and percentages of resources and of costs) were calculated.
RESULTS: The majority of subjects (85 809, or 87%) underwent screening mammography only. Of the 13 255 (13%) who underwent diagnostic imaging, additional mammographic views were obtained in most at the time of screening, within days or weeks of screening, or at short-interval follow-up. The total cost was $12 287 739. Approximately 80% ($9 777 670) of the total cost was related to imaging, and 68% ($8 410 313), specifically to screening mammography. Twenty percent ($2 510 069) of the total cost was associated with consultation and interventional procedures in only 2942 (3%) of the women, primarily those who underwent biopsy. Procedures resulted in benign findings in 2247 (76%) of the 2942. Mean total direct medical costs per capita were low ($99) in women who underwent screening mammography only, moderate ($286) in women who also underwent diagnostic imaging, and substantially greater in women who underwent biopsy ($993).
CONCLUSION: While the largest component cost of screening mammography is that incurred in obtaining screening views alone, the highest costs per capita are associated with interventional procedures. (c) RSNA, 2005.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15618376     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2341040125

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  24 in total

1.  Linear and nonlinear elastic modulus imaging: an application to breast cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Sevan Goenezen; Jean-Francois Dord; Zac Sink; Paul E Barbone; Jingfeng Jiang; Timothy J Hall; Assad A Oberai
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 10.048

2.  The Effect of Budgetary Restrictions on Breast Cancer Diagnostic Decisions.

Authors:  Mehmet U S Ayvaci; Oguzhan Alagoz; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Manuf Serv Oper Manag       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 7.600

3.  Measurement of breast tissue composition with dual energy cone-beam computed tomography: a postmortem study.

Authors:  Huanjun Ding; Justin L Ducote; Sabee Molloi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Value of Strain Elastography Ultrasound in Differentiation of Breast Masses and Histopathologic Correlation.

Authors:  Aysun Okar Atabey; Erkin Arıbal; Rabia Ergelen; Handan Kaya
Journal:  J Breast Health       Date:  2014-10-01

5.  Use of shear wave elastography to differentiate benign and malignant breast lesions.

Authors:  Deniz Çebi Olgun; Bora Korkmazer; Fahrettin Kılıç; Atilla Süleyman Dikici; Mehmet Velidedeoğlu; Fatih Aydoğan; Fatih Kantarcı; Mehmet Halit Yılmaz
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2014 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.630

6.  The mammographic density of a mass is a significant predictor of breast cancer.

Authors:  Ryan W Woods; Gale S Sisney; Lonie R Salkowski; Kazuhiko Shinki; Yunzhi Lin; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Discrimination of benign and malignant breast lesions by using shutter-speed dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Wei Huang; Luminita A Tudorica; Xin Li; Sunitha B Thakur; Yiyi Chen; Elizabeth A Morris; Ian J Tagge; Maayan E Korenblit; William D Rooney; Jason A Koutcher; Charles S Springer
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-08-09       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Breast tissue characterization with photon-counting spectral CT imaging: a postmortem breast study.

Authors:  Huanjun Ding; Michael J Klopfer; Justin L Ducote; Fumitaro Masaki; Sabee Molloi
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Large-Strain 3-D in Vivo Breast Ultrasound Strain Elastography Using a Multi-compression Strategy and a Whole-Breast Scanning System.

Authors:  Yuqi Wang; Matthew Bayer; Jingfeng Jiang; Timothy J Hall
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2019-09-21       Impact factor: 2.998

10.  Cost of services provided by the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.

Authors:  Donatus U Ekwueme; Sujha Subramanian; Justin G Trogdon; Jacqueline W Miller; Janet E Royalty; Chunyu Li; Gery P Guy; Wesley Crouse; Hope Thompson; James G Gardner
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.