Continuity of Radiologists Between Diagnostic Breast Imaging and Image-Guided Breast Biopsy: Impact on Patient-Reported Biopsy Morbidity Experiences.

IF 2 Q3 ONCOLOGY Journal of Breast Imaging Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1093/jbi/wbad099
Carol McLaughlin, Sarah E H Moorman, Chen Yin, Prasad R Shankar, Matthew S Davenport, Colleen H Neal, Renee W Pinsky, Akshat C Pujara
{"title":"Continuity of Radiologists Between Diagnostic Breast Imaging and Image-Guided Breast Biopsy: Impact on Patient-Reported Biopsy Morbidity Experiences.","authors":"Carol McLaughlin, Sarah E H Moorman, Chen Yin, Prasad R Shankar, Matthew S Davenport, Colleen H Neal, Renee W Pinsky, Akshat C Pujara","doi":"10.1093/jbi/wbad099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether continuity of care between diagnostic breast imaging and subsequent image-guided breast biopsy could reduce patient-reported biopsy-related morbidity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, pragmatically randomized, 2-arm health utilities analysis of 200 women undergoing diagnostic breast imaging followed by US- or stereotactic-guided breast biopsy at a single quaternary care center from September 3, 2019, to April 10, 2023. Breast biopsy-naive women with a BI-RADS 4 or 5 finding at diagnostic imaging were randomly scheduled for the typically first available biopsy appointment. One day after biopsy, enrolled patients were administered the Testing Morbidities Index (TMI). The primary outcome was the difference in TMI summary utility scores in patients who did vs did not have the same radiologist perform diagnostic imaging and biopsy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Response rates were 63% (100/159) for the different radiologist cohort and 71% (100/140) for the same radiologist cohort; all respondents answered all questions in both arms. Mean time to biopsy was 7 ± 6 days and 10 ± 9 days, and the number of participating radiologists was 11 and 18, respectively. There was no difference in individual measured domains (pain, fear, or anxiety before procedure; pain, embarrassment, fear, or anxiety during procedure; mental or physical impact after procedure; all P >.00625) or in overall patient morbidity (0.83 [95% CI, 0.81-0.85] vs 0.82 [95% CI: 0.80-0.84], P = .66).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Continuity of care between diagnostic breast imaging and image-guided breast biopsy did not affect morbidity associated with breast biopsy, suggesting that patients should be scheduled for the soonest available biopsy appointment rather than waiting for the same radiologist.</p>","PeriodicalId":43134,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Breast Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Breast Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbad099","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether continuity of care between diagnostic breast imaging and subsequent image-guided breast biopsy could reduce patient-reported biopsy-related morbidity.

Methods: This was a prospective, pragmatically randomized, 2-arm health utilities analysis of 200 women undergoing diagnostic breast imaging followed by US- or stereotactic-guided breast biopsy at a single quaternary care center from September 3, 2019, to April 10, 2023. Breast biopsy-naive women with a BI-RADS 4 or 5 finding at diagnostic imaging were randomly scheduled for the typically first available biopsy appointment. One day after biopsy, enrolled patients were administered the Testing Morbidities Index (TMI). The primary outcome was the difference in TMI summary utility scores in patients who did vs did not have the same radiologist perform diagnostic imaging and biopsy.

Results: Response rates were 63% (100/159) for the different radiologist cohort and 71% (100/140) for the same radiologist cohort; all respondents answered all questions in both arms. Mean time to biopsy was 7 ± 6 days and 10 ± 9 days, and the number of participating radiologists was 11 and 18, respectively. There was no difference in individual measured domains (pain, fear, or anxiety before procedure; pain, embarrassment, fear, or anxiety during procedure; mental or physical impact after procedure; all P >.00625) or in overall patient morbidity (0.83 [95% CI, 0.81-0.85] vs 0.82 [95% CI: 0.80-0.84], P = .66).

Conclusion: Continuity of care between diagnostic breast imaging and image-guided breast biopsy did not affect morbidity associated with breast biopsy, suggesting that patients should be scheduled for the soonest available biopsy appointment rather than waiting for the same radiologist.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
放射医师在乳腺诊断成像和图像引导乳腺活检之间的连续性:对患者报告的活检发病率的影响。
目的确定乳腺影像诊断与随后的影像引导乳腺活检之间的连续性护理是否能降低患者报告的活检相关发病率:这是一项前瞻性、实用随机、双臂健康效用分析,研究对象为 2019 年 9 月 3 日至 2023 年 4 月 10 日期间在一家四级医疗中心接受乳腺影像诊断并随后接受 US 或立体定向乳腺活检的 200 名女性。在诊断成像中发现BI-RADS 4或5的未接受过乳腺活检的女性被随机安排在通常情况下的第一个可用活检预约时间。活检一天后,入组患者接受检测发病指数(TMI)。主要结果是由同一放射科医生进行诊断成像和活检的患者与未由同一放射科医生进行诊断成像和活检的患者在 TMI 实用性总分上的差异:不同放射科医生组群的回复率为 63%(100/159),同一放射科医生组群的回复率为 71%(100/140);两组所有受访者都回答了所有问题。平均活检时间分别为 7 ± 6 天和 10 ± 9 天,参与的放射科医生人数分别为 11 人和 18 人。单个测量领域(术前疼痛、恐惧或焦虑;术中疼痛、尴尬、恐惧或焦虑;术后精神或身体影响;所有P >.00625)或患者总体发病率(0.83 [95% CI:0.81-0.85] vs. 0.82 [95% CI:0.80-0.84],P =.66)均无差异:乳腺成像诊断和图像引导乳腺活检之间的连续性并不会影响乳腺活检的相关发病率,这表明患者应尽快预约活检,而不是等待同一位放射科医生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
81
期刊最新文献
Performance of Abbreviated Breast MRI in High-Risk Patients in a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center. Developing a Career as a Clinician-Educator in Breast Imaging. Unknown Case: Non-mass Enhancement on Baseline MRI. Developing Financial Acumen as a Breast Imaging Radiologist. Methodological Considerations in Evaluating Breast Cancer Screening Studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1