1
|
Berg WA, Bandos AI, Sava MG. Analytic Hierarchy Process Analysis of Patient Preferences for Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Versus MRI as Supplemental Screening Options for Breast Cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20:758-768. [PMID: 37394083 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2023.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 04/20/2023] [Accepted: 05/03/2023] [Indexed: 07/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To guide implementation of supplemental breast screening by assessing patient preferences for contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) versus MRI using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) methodology. METHODS In an institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant protocol, from March 23 to June 3, 2022, we contacted 579 women who had both CEM screening and MRI. Women were e-mailed an invitation to complete an online survey developed using an AHP-based model to elicit preferences for CEM or MRI. Methods for categorical data analysis were used to evaluate factors affecting preferences, under the Bonferroni correction for multiplicity. RESULTS Complete responses were received from 222 (38.3%) women; the 189 women with a personal history of breast cancer had a mean age 61.8 years, and the 34 women without a personal history of breast cancer had a mean age of 53.6 years. Of 222 respondents, 157 (70.7%, confidence interval [CI]: 64.7-76.7) were determined to prefer CEM to MRI. Breast positioning was the most important criterion for 74 of 222 (33.3%) respondents, with claustrophobia, intravenous line placement, and overall stress most important for 38, 37, and 39 women (17.1%, 16.7%, and 17.6%), respectively, and noise level, contrast injection, and indifference being emphasized least frequently (by 10 [4.5%], 11 [5.0%], and 13 [5.9%] women, respectively). CEM preference was most prevalent (MRI least prevalent) for respondents emphasizing claustrophobia (37 of 38 [97%], CI: 86.2-99.9); CEM preference was least prevalent (MRI most prevalent) for respondents emphasizing breast positioning (40 of 74 [54%], CI: 42.1-65.7). CONCLUSIONS AHP-based modeling reveals strong patient preferences for CEM over MRI, with claustrophobia favoring preference for CEM and breast positioning relatively favoring preference for MRI. Our results should help guide implementation of screening CEM and MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wendie A Berg
- Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; ACR and the Society of Breast Imaging, Honorary Fellow of the Austrian Roentgen Society, and voluntary Chief Scientific Advisor to DenseBreast-info website.
| | - Andriy I Bandos
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - M Gabriela Sava
- Wilbur O. and Ann Powers College of Business, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina; current affiliation: Department of Applied Statistics and Operations Research, Allen W. and Carol M. Schmidhorst College of Business, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chesebro AL, Amornsiripanitch N, Lan Z, Bay CP, Chikarmane SA. Experience of a single healthcare system with screening mammography before and after COVID-19 shutdown. Clin Imaging 2023; 101:97-104. [PMID: 37327551 PMCID: PMC10249341 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2023.06.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2022] [Revised: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 06/06/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate COVID-19's longitudinal impact on screening mammography volume trends. METHODS HIPAA-compliant, IRB-approved, single institution, retrospective study of screening mammogram volumes before (10/21/2016-3/16/2020) and greater than two years after (6/17/2020-11/30/2022) a state-mandated COVID-19 shutdown (3/17/2020-6/16/2020) were reviewed. A segmented quasi-poisson linear regression model adjusting for seasonality and network and regional population growth compared volume trends before and after the shutdown of each variable: age, race, language, financial source, risk factor for severe COVID-19, and examination location. RESULTS Adjusted model demonstrated an overall increase of 65 screening mammograms per month before versus a persistent decrease of 5 mammograms per month for >2 years after the shutdown (p < 0.0001). In subgroup analysis, downward volume trends were noted in all age groups <70 years (age < 50: +9/month before vs. -7/month after shutdown; age 50-60: +17 vs. -7; and age 60-70: +21 vs. -2; all p < 0.001), those identifying as White (+55 vs. -8, p < 0.0001) and Black (+4 vs. +1, p = 0.009), all financial sources (Medicare: +22 vs. -3, p < 0.0001; Medicaid: +5 vs. +2, p = 0.006; private insurance/self-pay: +38 vs. -4, p < 0.0001), women with at least one risk factor for severe COVID-19 (+30 vs. -48, p < 0.0001), and screening mammograms performed at a hospital-based location (+48 vs. -14, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION The screening mammogram volume trend more than two years after the COVID-19 shutdown has continued to decline for most patient populations. Findings highlight the need to identify additional areas for education and outreach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allyson L Chesebro
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Radiology, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America; Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America.
| | - Nita Amornsiripanitch
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Radiology, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America; Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America.
| | - Zhou Lan
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Radiology, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America; Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America.
| | - Camden P Bay
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Radiology, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America; Takeda Pharmaceuticals, USA, Inc., 650 Kendall St., Cambridge, MA 02142, United States of America
| | - Sona A Chikarmane
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Radiology, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America; Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St., Boston, MA 02115, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Miller MM, Ganti R, Repich K, Patrie JT, Anderson RT, Harvey JA. Factors Associated With Breast Cancer Screening Behaviors Among Women With Dense Breasts. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2023; 5:125-134. [PMID: 38416932 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbac090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 03/01/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We sought to identify patient factors associated with patient-reported screening behaviors in women with dense breasts. METHODS An IRB-approved survey study of women with dense breasts presenting for annual screening mammography at an outpatient imaging center was previously conducted from March 2017 to February 2018. The survey included questions regarding mammographic screening frequency and recent participation in supplemental screening. These survey data were combined post hoc with clinical and demographic data and socioeconomic data imputed from census data. Logistic regression was used to identify patient factors associated with reported screening behaviors. RESULTS Surveys were completed by 508 women (median age, 59.0 years; range, 31.0-86.0 years) with dense breasts. Multivariable analysis demonstrated an independent association of undergoing mammographic screening annually with a history of discussing breast density with a doctor (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.60; P = 0.019). Undergoing supplemental screening in the previous three years was independently associated with younger age (AOR, 1.59; P = 0.004), strong family history of breast cancer (AOR, 3.84; P = 0.027), higher perceived personal risk for breast cancer (AOR, 3.47; P = 0.004), and increased concern about radiation associated with screening examinations (AOR, 3.31; P = 0.006). CONCLUSION Women with dense breasts who had discussed breast density with a doctor were more likely to report undergoing annual screening mammography, while younger women and women with a strong family history of breast cancer, higher perceived personal risk for breast cancer, or greater concern about radiation were more likely to report recently undergoing supplemental screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew M Miller
- University of Virginia Health System, Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Ramapriya Ganti
- University of Virginia Health System, Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Kathy Repich
- University of Virginia Health System, Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - James T Patrie
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Roger T Anderson
- University of Virginia School of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Jennifer A Harvey
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Department of Imaging Sciences, Rochester, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Editor's Notebook: November 2021. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021; 217:1025-1026. [PMID: 34677085 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.21.26655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
5
|
Miller MM, Meneveau MO, Rochman CM, Schroen AT, Lattimore CM, Gaspard PA, Cubbage RS, Showalter SL. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer screening volumes and patient screening behaviors. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021; 189:237-246. [PMID: 34032985 PMCID: PMC8145189 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-021-06252-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 05/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Purpose In order to facilitate targeted outreach, we sought to identify patient populations with a lower likelihood of returning for breast cancer screening after COVID-19-related imaging center closures. Methods Weekly total screening mammograms performed throughout 2019 (baseline year) and 2020 (COVID-19-impacted year) were compared. Demographic and clinical characteristics, including age, race, ethnicity, breast density, breast cancer history, insurance status, imaging facility type used, and need for interpreter, were compared between patients imaged from March 16 to October 31 in 2019 (baseline cohort) and 2020 (COVID-19-impacted cohort). Census data and an online map service were used to impute socioeconomic variables and calculate travel times for each patient. Logistic regression was used to identify patient characteristics associated with a lower likelihood of returning for screening after COVID-19-related closures. Results The year-over-year cumulative difference in screening mammogram volumes peaked in week 21, with 2962 fewer exams in the COVID-19-impacted year. By week 47, this deficit had reduced by 49.4% to 1498. A lower likelihood of returning for screening after COVID-19-related closures was independently associated with younger age (odds ratio (OR) 0.78, p < 0.001), residence in a higher poverty area (OR 0.991, p = 0.014), lack of health insurance (OR 0.65, p = 0.007), need for an interpreter (OR 0.68, p = 0.029), longer travel time (OR 0.998, p < 0.001), and utilization of mobile mammography services (OR 0.27, p < 0.001). Conclusion Several patient factors are associated with a lower likelihood of returning for screening mammography after COVID-19-related closures. Knowledge of these factors can guide targeted outreach to vulnerable patients to facilitate breast cancer screening. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-021-06252-1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew M Miller
- Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health System, 1215 Lee St., Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA.
| | - Max O Meneveau
- Department of Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Carrie M Rochman
- Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health System, 1215 Lee St., Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA
| | - Anneke T Schroen
- Department of Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Courtney M Lattimore
- Department of Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Patricia A Gaspard
- Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health System, 1215 Lee St., Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA
| | - Richard S Cubbage
- Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health System, 1215 Lee St., Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA
| | - Shayna L Showalter
- Department of Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|