Publication:
Advanced Breast Imaging Availability by Screening Facility Characteristics

Thumbnail Image

Date

2015

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Elsevier BV
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Lee, Christoph I., Andy Bogart, Rebecca A. Hubbard, Eniola T. Obadina, Deirdre A. Hill, Jennifer S. Haas, Anna N.A. Tosteson, et al. 2015. “Advanced Breast Imaging Availability by Screening Facility Characteristics.” Academic Radiology 22 (7) (July): 846–852. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2015.02.011.

Research Data

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To determine the relationship between screening mammography facility characteristics and on-site availability of advanced breast imaging services required for supplemental screening and the diagnostic evaluation of abnormal screening findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from all active imaging facilities across six regional registries of the National Cancer Institute-funded Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium offering screening mammography in calendar years 2011-2012 (n = 105). We used generalized estimating equations regression models to identify associations between facility characteristics (eg, academic affiliation, practice type) and availability of on-site advanced breast imaging (eg, ultrasound [US], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and image-guided biopsy services. RESULTS: Breast MRI was not available at any nonradiology or breast imaging-only facilities. A combination of breast US, breast MRI, and imaging-guided breast biopsy services was available at 76.0% of multispecialty breast centers compared to 22.2% of full diagnostic radiology practices (P = .0047) and 75.0% of facilities with academic affiliations compared to 29.0% of those without academic affiliations (P = .04). Both supplemental screening breast US and screening breast MRI were available at 28.0% of multispecialty breast centers compared to 4.7% of full diagnostic radiology practices (P < .01) and 25.0% of academic facilities compared to 8.5% of nonacademic facilities (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Screening facility characteristics are strongly associated with the availability of on-site advanced breast imaging and image-guided biopsy service. Therefore, the type of imaging facility a woman attends for screening may have important implications on her timely access to supplemental screening and diagnostic breast imaging services.

Description

Keywords

Screening, breast cancer, mammography, diagnostic imaging

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles (OAP), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories