Literature DB >> 2748825

Communication problems after mammographic screening.

C L Robertson1, D B Kopans.   

Abstract

The authors prospectively assessed the effectiveness of requests for immediate additional evaluation or biopsy made on the basis of the interpretation of abnormal findings on screening mammograms. In 1,125 screening mammograms obtained in asymptomatic women referred by physicians, the findings in 63 (6%) were interpreted as requiring additional imaging or biopsy. Written reports were sent, and in all cases the office of the referring physician was notified directly by phone. Physicians were periodically contacted if no follow-up had been performed to resolve the questioned abnormality. In the first 2.5 months, no action had been taken in 40 of 63 (63%) of the recommendations. After additional calls, this diminished to 10 of 63 (16%) at 3.5 months, but at 4.5 months four of 63 (6%) patients had not undergone the recommended additional studies. These results suggest the need for development of systems to ensure prompt action in patients with abnormal findings at mammographic screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2748825     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.172.2.2748825

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


  7 in total

1.  Experience with indeterminate mammograms.

Authors:  P De Neef; J Gandara
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1991-01

2.  The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: opportunity for a rethink.

Authors:  A S Basinski
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Who You Gonna Call? Automatically Connecting Radiologists to the Right Clinician.

Authors:  Ross Filice
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Reviewing imaging examination results with a radiologist immediately after study completion: patient preferences and assessment of feasibility in an academic department.

Authors:  Jay Pahade; Corey Couto; Roger B Davis; Payal Patel; Bettina Siewert; Max P Rosen
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Effect of discharge summary availability during post-discharge visits on hospital readmission.

Authors:  Carl van Walraven; Ratika Seth; Peter C Austin; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Prevalence of information gaps in the emergency department and the effect on patient outcomes.

Authors:  Andrew Stiell; Alan J Forster; Ian G Stiell; Carl van Walraven
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-11-11       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Association of communication between hospital-based physicians and primary care providers with patient outcomes.

Authors:  Chaim M Bell; Jeffrey L Schnipper; Andrew D Auerbach; Peter J Kaboli; Tosha B Wetterneck; David V Gonzales; Vineet M Arora; James X Zhang; David O Meltzer
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-12-20       Impact factor: 5.128

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.