Literature DB >> 23233265

Navigating Latinas with breast screen abnormalities to diagnosis: the Six Cities Study.

Amelie G Ramirez1, 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.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND.: Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Latinas, chiefly because of later diagnosis. The time from screening to diagnosis is critical to optimizing cancer care, yet the efficacy of navigation in reducing it is insufficiently documented. Here, the authors evaluate a culturally sensitive patient navigation program to reduce the time to diagnosis and increase the proportions of women diagnosed within 30 days and 60 days. METHODS.: The authors analyzed 425 Latinas who had Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) radiologic abnormalities categorized as BI-RADS-3, BI-RADS-4, or BI-RADS-5 from July 2008 to January 2011. There were 217 women in the navigated group and 208 women in the control group. Women were navigated by locally trained navigators or were not navigated (data for this group were abstracted from charts). The Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional hazards regression, and logistic regression were used to determine differences between groups. RESULTS.: The time to diagnosis was shorter in the navigated group (mean, 32.5 days vs 44.6 days in the control group; hazard ratio, 1.32; P = .007). Stratified analysis revealed that navigation significantly shortened the time to diagnosis among women who had BI-RADS-3 radiologic abnormalities (mean, 21.3 days vs 63.0 days; hazard ratio, 2.42; P < .001) but not among those who had BI-RADS-4 or BI-RADS-5 radiologic abnormalities (mean, 37.6 days vs 36.9 days; hazard ratio, 0.98; P = .989). Timely diagnosis occurred more frequently among navigated Latinas (within 30 days: 67.3% vs 57.7%; P = .045; within 60 days: 86.2% vs 78.4%; P = .023). This was driven by the BI-RADS-3 strata (within 30 days: 83.6% vs 50%; P < .001; within 60 days: 94.5% vs 67.2%; P < .001). A lack of missed appointments was associated with timely diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS.: Patient-centered navigation to assist Latina women with abnormal screening mammograms appeared to reduced the time to diagnosis and increase rates of timely diagnosis overall. However, in stratified analyses, only navigated Latinas with an initial BI-RADS-3 screen benefited, probably because of a reduction in missed diagnostic appointments.
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23233265      PMCID: PMC3628781          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27912

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  31 in total

1.  Malignancy in BI-RADS category 3 mammographic lesions.

Authors:  Ferris M Hall
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Time to diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer: results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1991-1995.

Authors:  L S Caplan; D S May; L C Richardson
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms: findings from the race differences in screening mammography process study (United States).

Authors:  Beth A Jones; Amy Dailey; Lisa Calvocoressi; Kam Reams; Stanislav V Kasl; Carol Lee; Helen Hsu
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.506

4.  BI-RADS classification for management of abnormal mammograms.

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

5.  Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Racial inequities in the timing of breast cancer detection, diagnosis, and initiation of treatment.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Connie Y Nakano; Hannah M Linden; Lisa M Reisch; John Z Ayanian; Eric B Larson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Anxiety after an abnormal screening mammogram is a serious problem.

Authors:  Claudia M G Keyzer-Dekker; Jolanda De Vries; Lotje van Esch; Miranda F Ernst; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen; Jan A Roukema; Alida F W van der Steeg
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2011-09-15       Impact factor: 4.380

8.  Racial differences in timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography.

Authors:  S W Chang; K Kerlikowske; A Nápoles-Springer; S F Posner; E A Sickles; E J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1996-10-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2001, with a special feature regarding survival.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Limin X Clegg; Elizabeth Ward; Lynn A G Ries; Xiaocheng Wu; Patricia M Jamison; Phyllis A Wingo; Holly L Howe; Robert N Anderson; Brenda K Edwards
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 10.  A historical overview of health disparities and the potential of eHealth solutions.

Authors:  Michael C Gibbons
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2005-10-04       Impact factor: 5.428

View more
  21 in total

1.  The Development of a Minority Recruitment Plan for Cancer Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Monica Trevino; Susan Padalecki; Anand Karnad; Alberto Parra; Steve Weitman; Melissa Nashawati; Brad H Pollock; Amelie Ramirez; Ian M Thompson
Journal:  J Community Med Health Educ       Date:  2013-09-01

2.  Conversations about Abnormal Mammograms on Distress and Timely Follow-up Across Ethnicity.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; Shirley A A Beresford; Tara Hayes Constant; Beti Thompson
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Unlicensed Health Care Personnel and Patient Outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Bodenheimer
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Empowering Latina breast cancer patients to make informed decisions about clinical trials: a pilot study.

Authors:  Patricia Chalela; Edgar Muñoz; Kipling J Gallion; Virginia Kaklamani; Amelie G Ramirez
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 3.046

5.  Patient navigation to improve follow-up of abnormal mammograms among disadvantaged women.

Authors:  Sanja Percac-Lima; Jeffrey M Ashburner; Anne Marie McCarthy; Sorbarikor Piawah; Steven J Atlas
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Psychological Outcomes After a False Positive Mammogram: Preliminary Evidence for Ethnic Differences Across Time.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; Shirley A A Beresford; Beti Thompson
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2016-02-19

Review 7.  Breast cancer interventions serving US-based Latinas: current approaches and directions.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; Beti Thompson; Noah Espinoza; Rachel Ceballos
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2013-07

8.  The Yo me cuido® Program: Addressing Breast Cancer Screening and Prevention Among Hispanic Women.

Authors:  Jenna L Davis; Roberto Ramos; Venessa Rivera-Colón; Myriam Escobar; Jeannette Palencia; Cathy G Grant; B Lee Green
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 9.  Training in Patient Navigation: A Review of the Research Literature.

Authors:  Amy E Ustjanauskas; Marissa Bredice; Sumayah Nuhaily; Lisa Kath; Kristen J Wells
Journal:  Health Promot Pract       Date:  2015-12-08

10.  Understanding the patient-provider communication needs and experiences of Latina and non-Latina White women following an abnormal mammogram.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; Sarah D Hohl; Linda K Ko; Edgar A Rodriguez; Beti Thompson; Shirley A A Beresford
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.037

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.