BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend minimally invasive breast biopsy (MIBB) as the gold standard for the diagnosis of breast lesions. The purpose of this study was to describe geographic patterns and time trends in the use of MIBB in Texas. METHODS: We used 100% Texas Medicare claims data (2000-2008) to identify women older than 66 years of age who underwent breast biopsy. Biopsies were classified as open or MIBB. Time trends, racial/ethnic variation, and geographic variation in the use of biopsy techniques were examined. RESULTS: A total of 87,165 breast biopsies were performed on 75,518 breast masses in 67,582 women; 65.8% of the initial biopsies were MIBB. Radiologists performed 70.3% and surgeons performed 26.2% of MIBB. Surgeons performed 94.2% of open biopsies. Hispanic women were less likely to undergo MIBB (55.9%) compared with white (66.6%) and black (68.9%) women (p < 0.0001). Women undergoing MIBB were also more likely to live in metropolitan areas and have higher income and educational levels (p < 0.0001). The rate of MIBB increased from 44.4% in 2001 to 79.1% in 2008 (p < 0.0001). There are clear geographic patterns in MIBB use, with highest use near major cities. Although rates are increasing overall, rates of improvement in the use of MIBB vary considerably across geographic regions and remain persistently low in more rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in the use of MIBB over time, MIBB use was consistently lower than recommended. We must identify specific barriers in rural areas to effectively change practice and achieve the statewide goal of 90% MIBB.
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend minimally invasive breast biopsy (MIBB) as the gold standard for the diagnosis of breast lesions. The purpose of this study was to describe geographic patterns and time trends in the use of MIBB in Texas. METHODS: We used 100% Texas Medicare claims data (2000-2008) to identify women older than 66 years of age who underwent breast biopsy. Biopsies were classified as open or MIBB. Time trends, racial/ethnic variation, and geographic variation in the use of biopsy techniques were examined. RESULTS: A total of 87,165 breast biopsies were performed on 75,518 breast masses in 67,582 women; 65.8% of the initial biopsies were MIBB. Radiologists performed 70.3% and surgeons performed 26.2% of MIBB. Surgeons performed 94.2% of open biopsies. Hispanic women were less likely to undergo MIBB (55.9%) compared with white (66.6%) and black (68.9%) women (p < 0.0001). Women undergoing MIBB were also more likely to live in metropolitan areas and have higher income and educational levels (p < 0.0001). The rate of MIBB increased from 44.4% in 2001 to 79.1% in 2008 (p < 0.0001). There are clear geographic patterns in MIBB use, with highest use near major cities. Although rates are increasing overall, rates of improvement in the use of MIBB vary considerably across geographic regions and remain persistently low in more rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in the use of MIBB over time, MIBB use was consistently lower than recommended. We must identify specific barriers in rural areas to effectively change practice and achieve the statewide goal of 90% MIBB.
Authors: Jared H Linebarger; Jeffrey Landercasper; Richard L Ellis; Jacob D Gundrum; Kristen A Marcou; Brooke M De Maiffe; Jane M Hudak; Jeremiah J Andersen Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Richelle T Williams; Katharine Yao; Andrew K Stewart; David J Winchester; Mary Turk; Addie Gorchow; Nora Jaskowiak; David P Winchester Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Tara M Breslin; Jamie Caughran; Jane Pettinga; Cheryl Wesen; Ann Mehringer; Huiying Yin; David Share; Samuel M Silver Journal: Surgery Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Melvin J Silverstein; Abram Recht; Michael D Lagios; Ira J Bleiweiss; Peter W Blumencranz; Terri Gizienski; Steven E Harms; Jay Harness; Roger J Jackman; V Suzanne Klimberg; Robert Kuske; Gary M Levine; Michael N Linver; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Hope Rugo; Kathy Schilling; Debu Tripathy; Frank A Vicini; Pat W Whitworth; Shawna C Willey Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-08-20 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Therese B Bevers; Benjamin O Anderson; Ermelinda Bonaccio; Saundra Buys; Sandra Buys; Mary B Daly; Peter J Dempsey; William B Farrar; Irving Fleming; Judy E Garber; Randall E Harris; Alexandra S Heerdt; Mark Helvie; John G Huff; Nazanin Khakpour; Seema A Khan; Helen Krontiras; Gary Lyman; Elizabeth Rafferty; Sara Shaw; Mary Lou Smith; Theodore N Tsangaris; Cheryl Williams; Thomas Yankeelov; Thomas Yaneeklov Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Nina P Tamirisa; Kristin M Sheffield; Abhishek D Parmar; Christopher J Zimmermann; Deepak Adhikari; Gabriela M Vargas; Yong-Fang Kuo; James S Goodwin; Taylor S Riall Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: David C Borgstrom; Karen Deveney; Dorothy Hughes; Isolina R Rossi; Matthew B Rossi; Randy Lehman; Stephanie LeMaster; Mark Puls Journal: Curr Probl Surg Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 2.815
Authors: Brian L Sprague; Thomas P Ahern; Sally D Herschorn; Michelle Sowden; Donald L Weaver; Marie E Wood Journal: Prev Med Date: 2021-07-22 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Andrzej Lorek; Andrzej Śliwczyński; Barbara Więckowska; Bartosz Stawowski; Janusz Dagiel; Jacek Gawrychowski Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2018-07-17