OBJECTIVE: To institute a patient navigator program for underinsured women to eliminate delays in diagnostic resolution of abnormal screening mammograms, provide services for abnormalities noted during breast cancer screening, describe demographic and clinical characteristics of enrollees, and assess postscreening follow-up care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Coordinators from area health departments worked with a navigator nurse at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center in Jacksonville, FL, to refer patients for additional diagnostic services, including diagnostic mammography, ultrasonography, ultrasonography-guided biopsy, stereotactic biopsy, breast magnetic resonance imaging, and biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging. Women with abnormal screening mammograms (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] category 4 or 5) or palpable suspect breast masses were eligible. Data were extracted from clinical service records. Timeliness of postscreening follow-up was assessed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 447 women from June 30, 2000, to December 29, 2006. Data on the time from screening to diagnosis were available for 399 women, and median time from detection of screening abnormality to diagnosis was 37 days. Time between screening and diagnosis was 60 days or less for 325 (81%) of the 399 women for whom data were available and for 60 (82%) of the 73 women with BI-RADS category 4 or 5 assessments. Both of these percentages exceeded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention quality benchmark of 75%. Mean time from study enrollment to diagnosis was 2 days for women with BI-RADS category 3 or 4 assessments and 7 days for women with BI-RADS category 5 assessments. CONCLUSION: This program demonstrated a successful collaboration between an academic medical center and community health centers. Most women with BI-RADS category 4 or 5 assessments received a diagnosis within 60 days of screening.
OBJECTIVE: To institute a patient navigator program for underinsured women to eliminate delays in diagnostic resolution of abnormal screening mammograms, provide services for abnormalities noted during breast cancer screening, describe demographic and clinical characteristics of enrollees, and assess postscreening follow-up care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Coordinators from area health departments worked with a navigator nurse at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center in Jacksonville, FL, to refer patients for additional diagnostic services, including diagnostic mammography, ultrasonography, ultrasonography-guided biopsy, stereotactic biopsy, breast magnetic resonance imaging, and biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging. Women with abnormal screening mammograms (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] category 4 or 5) or palpable suspect breast masses were eligible. Data were extracted from clinical service records. Timeliness of postscreening follow-up was assessed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 447 women from June 30, 2000, to December 29, 2006. Data on the time from screening to diagnosis were available for 399 women, and median time from detection of screening abnormality to diagnosis was 37 days. Time between screening and diagnosis was 60 days or less for 325 (81%) of the 399 women for whom data were available and for 60 (82%) of the 73 women with BI-RADS category 4 or 5 assessments. Both of these percentages exceeded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention quality benchmark of 75%. Mean time from study enrollment to diagnosis was 2 days for women with BI-RADS category 3 or 4 assessments and 7 days for women with BI-RADS category 5 assessments. CONCLUSION: This program demonstrated a successful collaboration between an academic medical center and community health centers. Most women with BI-RADS category 4 or 5 assessments received a diagnosis within 60 days of screening.
Authors: Margaret M Eberl; Chester H Fox; Stephen B Edge; Cathleen A Carter; Martin C Mahoney Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2006 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Brent R Asplin; Karin V Rhodes; Helen Levy; Nicole Lurie; A Lauren Crain; Bradley P Carlin; Arthur L Kellermann Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-09-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: K Robin Yabroff; Kathleen Shakira Washington; Amy Leader; Elizabeth Neilson; Jeanne Mandelblatt Journal: Med Care Res Rev Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Amelie G Ramirez; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Frank J Penedo; Gregory A Talavera; J Emilio Carrillo; Maria E Fernandez; Alan E C Holden; Edgar Munoz; Sandra San Miguel; Kip Gallion Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-12-10 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Karen Donelan; Johanna R Mailhot; David Dutwin; Kristen Barnicle; Sarah Abernethy Oo; Karin Hobrecker; Sanja Percac-Lima; Bruce A Chabner Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-07-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Tracy A Battaglia; Linda Burhansstipanov; Samantha S Murrell; Andrea J Dwyer; Sarah E Caron Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Karen M Freund; Tracy A Battaglia; Elizabeth Calhoun; Julie S Darnell; Donald J Dudley; Kevin Fiscella; Martha L Hare; Nancy LaVerda; Ji-Hyun Lee; Paul Levine; David M Murray; Steven R Patierno; Peter C Raich; Richard G Roetzheim; Melissa Simon; Frederick R Snyder; Victoria Warren-Mears; Elizabeth M Whitley; Paul Winters; Gregory S Young; Electra D Paskett Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Li Jiang; Julie Gilbert; Hugh Langley; Rahim Moineddin; Patti A Groome Journal: Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 3.240