Positive impact of a breast-health triaging system on breast-care access and physician satisfaction

Diagnostic and therapeutic path of breast cancer: effectiveness, appropriateness, and costs--results from the DOCMa study

Objective

An increase in breast cancer incidence has been documented in Italy and in other countries, and some women decide by themselves to undergo diagnostic examinations outside the official screening campaigns. The aim of this paper was to analyze – in terms of effectiveness, appropriate access, and related costs – the path spontaneously followed by a sample of Italian women for the early diagnosis of breast cancer.

Subjects and methods

A total of 143 women who consecutively referred themselves to the breast cancer outpatient facilities at the Sant’Andrea University Hospital in Rome from May to June 2007 were enrolled in the study, gave their consent, and were screened according to their individual risk factors for breast cancer. The entire diagnostic and therapeutic path followed in the previous 2 years by each of them, either at Sant’Andrea or in other medical facilities, was reviewed and evaluated in terms of its operative efficiency and fair economic value.

Results

The subjects’ mean age was 47.5 years (standard deviation 13.6 years); 55% of the women were <50 years old (28% <40 years), and were thus not included in the official screening campaigns; 97 women (70%) were requesting a routine control; and 49% of them had already undergone four to seven examinations before the enrollment, although no major risk factor was present in 73.5%. After enrollment in the study, nine of the patients had surgical interventions performed on them at Sant’Andrea’s, identifying five invasive carcinomas and two ductal in situ carcinomas and two benign lesions. Operative efficiency and fair economic value were found to be optimal only in diagnostic/therapeutic paths followed at Sant’Andrea.

Conclusion

The diagnostic path at Sant’Andrea’s specialized center for breast cancer diagnosis and therapy is characterized by higher operative efficiency and more sustainable costs than at general hospitals, outpatient facilities run by local health authorities, or private medical centers. This result seems to confirm the present tendency to refer high-risk patients for breast cancer directly to breast units like the one at Sant’Andrea.

The effect of imaging on the clinical management of breast pain

BACKGROUND

Breast pain is a common complaint to primary care and breast specialists. Literature recommends imaging to provide reassurance of benign etiology. The effect of imaging on reassurance and subsequent healthcare utilization has not been described.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if initial imaging for breast pain reduces subsequent utilization.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study at a hospital-based breast health practice.

PATIENTS

Women referred for breast pain from 2006-2009.

MAIN MEASURES

Imaging ordered at initial provider visit; clinical utilization, defined as the number of follow-up visits, diagnostic imaging studies, and biopsies completed within 12 months following initial visit.

KEY RESULTS

Sixty-percent of women were age 40 or younger, 87% were from racial/ethnic minority groups. Twenty-five percent had imaging ordered at initial visit. Of those who received initial imaging, 75% had normal radiographic findings, yet 98% returned for additional evaluation. In adjusted analyses, women with initial imaging had increased clinical services utilization (OR 25.4, 95% CI: 16.7, 38.6). Women with normal clinical breast exams who received initial imaging exhibited increased odds for subsequent clinical services utilization (OR 23.8, 95% CI: 12.9, 44.0). Six cancers were diagnosed; imaging in the absence of clinical breast exam abnormalities did not result in any cancer identification.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial imaging for women with breast pain increased the odds of subsequent clinical utilization and did not increase reassurance in ruling out malignancy.

Do telemedicine wound care specialist consults meet the needs of the referring physician? A survey of primary care providers

The purpose of our study was to determine the factors that influence the use of telemedicine consultation by primary care physicians (PCPs) in the management of patients with problem wounds. A short questionnaire was administered to thirty-six PCPs who referred to our Wound Care Program within one year. Participants were asked to rate the importance of specific concerns and benefits regarding the role of wound care surgical specialist (WCSS) and the use of telemedicine consults prior to possible face-to-face consultation. Sixty percent of respondents felt comfortable with telemedicine consultation based on recommendations alone. The total number of patients referred for telemedicine consult was 230, and face-to-face consultation with a WCSS was offered and arranged for 30% of patients. The perception of shared decision making, streamlining patient care, and an opportunity for followup were all highly ranked benefits. The majority of PCPs (93%) agreed that telemedicine wound care consult is a useful tool in their practice and would continue to use the telemedicine consult service.

Triaging referrals as part of hematology/oncology fellowship training

We developed an integrative component of the consult rotation for fellows training in hematology/oncology. This component consisted of triaging all consults to the hematology/oncology service of the CAVHS during a 1-year period of time. The goals of the rotation were to improve timeliness of response to consultation requests, to gain experience in differential diagnosis of patients with potential hematologic/oncologic disorders through of such patients, review of decisions with attending physicians, and communication of such with the referring physician. The major benefits were that fellows integrated didactic learning into real-life clinical cases, selected patients for their continuity clinic to assure sufficient variety and complexity of cases, honed their communication skills, learned about referring and attending physicians' styles, and gained practice in clinical vignettes representative of cases they would be expected to see in clinical practice. Disadvantages were time involvement (approximately 2 h/day) and risks of over- or under-referrals. Administratively, there was a significant decline in the wait time for patients to be seen in the hematology/oncology service. In all, this elective is a valuable integrative experience of senior fellows, but may have less value for first year fellows.