Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 218(6): 988-996, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054820

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND. Screening mammography facilities closed during the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020. Recovery of screening volumes has varied across patient subgroups and facilities. OBJECTIVE. We compared screening mammography volumes and patient and facility characteristics between periods before COVID-19 and early and later postclosure recovery periods. METHODS. This retrospective study included screening mammograms performed in the same 2-month period (May 26-July 26) in 2019 (pre-COVID-19), 2020 (early recovery), and 2021 (late recovery after targeted interventions to expand access) and across multiple facility types (urban, suburban, community health center). Suburban sites had highest proportion of White patients and the greatest scheduling flexibility and expanded appointments during initial reopening. Findings were compared across years. RESULTS. For White patients, volumes decreased 36.6% from 6550 in 2019 (4384 in 2020) and then increased 61.0% to 6579 in 2021; for patients with races other than White, volumes decreased 53.9% from 1321 in 2019 (609 in 2020) and then increased 136.8% to 1442 in 2021. The percentage of mammograms in patients with races other than White was 16.8% in 2019, 12.2% in 2020, and 18.0% in 2021. The proportion performed at the urban center was 55.3% in 2019, 42.2% in 2020, and 45.9% in 2021; the proportion at suburban sites was 34.0% in 2019, 49.2% in 2020, and 43.5% in 2021. Pre-COVID-19 volumes were reached by the sixth week after reopening for suburban sites but were not reached during early recovery for the other sites. The proportion that were performed on Saturday for suburban sites was similar across periods, whereas the proportion performed on Saturday for the urban site was 7.6% in 2019, 5.3% in 2020, and 8.8% in 2021; the community health center did not offer Saturday appointments during recovery. CONCLUSION. After reopening, screening shifted from urban to suburban settings, with a disproportionate screening decrease in patients with races other than White. Initial delayed access at facilities serving underserved populations exacerbated disparities. Interventions to expand access resulted in late recovery volumes exceeding prepandemic volumes in patients with races other than White. CLINICAL IMPACT. Interventions to support equitable access across facilities serving diverse patient populations may mitigate potential widening disparities in breast cancer diagnosis during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Architectural Accessibility , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies
2.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 218(2): 270-278, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1793148

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND. The need for second visits between screening mammography and diagnostic imaging contributes to disparities in the time to breast cancer diagnosis. During the COVID-19 pandemic, an immediate-read screening mammography program was implemented to reduce patient visits and decrease time to diagnostic imaging. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of an immediate-read screening program with focus on disparities in same-day diagnostic imaging after abnormal findings are made at screening mammography. METHODS. In May 2020, an immediate-read screening program was implemented whereby a dedicated breast imaging radiologist interpreted all screening mammograms in real time; patients received results before discharge; and efforts were made to perform any recommended diagnostic imaging during the visit (performed by different radiologists). Screening mammographic examinations performed from June 1, 2019, through October 31, 2019 (preimplementation period), and from June 1, 2020, through October 31, 2020 (postimplementation period), were retrospectively identified. Patient characteristics were recorded from the electronic medical record. Multivariable logistic regression models incorporating patient age, race and ethnicity, language, and insurance type were estimated to identify factors associated with same-day diagnostic imaging. Screening metrics were compared between periods. RESULTS. A total of 8222 preimplementation and 7235 postimplementation screening examinations were included; 521 patients had abnormal screening findings before implementation, and 359 after implementation. Before implementation, 14.8% of patients underwent same-day diagnostic imaging after abnormal screening mammograms. This percentage increased to 60.7% after implementation. Before implementation, patients who identified their race as other than White had significantly lower odds than patients who identified their race as White of undergoing same-day diagnostic imaging after receiving abnormal screening results (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10-0.86; p = .03). After implementation, the odds of same-day diagnostic imaging were not significantly different between patients of other races and White patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.50-1.71; p = .80). After implementation, there was no significant difference in race and ethnicity between patients who underwent and those who did not undergo same-day diagnostic imaging after receiving abnormal results of screening mammography (p > .05). The rate of abnormal interpretation was significantly lower after than it was before implementation (5.0% vs 6.3%; p < .001). Cancer detection rate and PPV1 (PPV based on positive findings at screening examination) were not significantly different before and after implementation (p > .05). CONCLUSION. Implementation of the immediate-read screening mammography program reduced prior racial and ethnic disparities in same-day diagnostic imaging after abnormal screening mammograms. CLINICAL IMPACT. An immediate-read screening program provides a new paradigm for improved screening mammography workflow that allows more rapid diagnostic workup with reduced disparities in care.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delayed Diagnosis/prevention & control , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/methods , Mammography/methods , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Time
3.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 217(3): 584-586, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1320565

ABSTRACT

Reports of patients with axillary adenopathy identified on breast imaging after coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination are rising. We propose a pragmatic management approach based on clinical presentation, vaccination delivery, and imaging findings. In the settings of screening mammography, screening MRI, and diagnostic imaging workup of breast symptoms, with no imaging findings beyond unilateral axillary adenopathy ipsilateral to recent (within the past 6 weeks) vaccination, we report the adenopathy as benign with no further imaging indicated if no nodes are palpable 6 weeks after the last dose. For patients with palpable axillary adenopathy in the setting of ipsilateral recent vaccination, clinical follow-up of the axilla is recommended. In all these scenarios, axillary ultrasound is recommended if clinical concern persists 6 weeks after vaccination. In patients with a recent breast cancer diagnosis in the pre- or peritreatment setting, prompt recommended imaging is encouraged as well as vaccination (in the thigh or contralateral arm). Our recommendations align with the ACR BI-RADS Atlas and aim to reduce patient anxiety, provider burden, and costs of unnecessary evaluation of enlarged nodes in the setting of recent vaccinations and, also, to avoid further delays in vaccinations and breast cancer screening during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Axilla/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Mammography , Ultrasonography , Vaccination
4.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 18(6): 843-852, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1131426

ABSTRACT

Reports are rising of patients with unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy, visible on diverse imaging examinations, after recent coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination. With less than 10% of the US population fully vaccinated, we can prepare now for informed care of patients imaged after recent vaccination. The authors recommend documenting vaccination information (date[s] of vaccination[s], injection site [left or right, arm or thigh], type of vaccine) on intake forms and having this information available to the radiologist at the time of examination interpretation. These recommendations are based on three key factors: the timing and location of the vaccine injection, clinical context, and imaging findings. The authors report isolated unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy (i.e., no imaging findings outside of visible lymphadenopathy), which is ipsilateral to recent (prior 6 weeks) vaccination, as benign with no further imaging indicated. Clinical management is recommended, with ultrasound if clinical concern persists 6 weeks after the final vaccination dose. In the clinical setting to stage a recent cancer diagnosis or assess response to therapy, the authors encourage prompt recommended imaging and vaccination (possibly in the thigh or contralateral arm according to the location of the known cancer). Management in this clinical context of a current cancer diagnosis is tailored to the specific case, ideally with consultation between the oncology treatment team and the radiologist. The aim of these recommendations is to (1) reduce patient anxiety, provider burden, and costs of unnecessary evaluation of enlarged nodes in the setting of recent vaccination and (2) avoid further delays in vaccinations and recommended imaging for best patient care during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lymphadenopathy , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Lymphadenopathy/diagnostic imaging , Radiologists , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
5.
Acad Radiol ; 28(1): 136-141, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1023390

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic required restructuring of Radiology trainee education across US institutions. While reduced clinical imaging volume and mandates to maintain physical distancing presented new challenges to traditional medical education during this period, new opportunities developed to support our division in providing high-quality training for residents and fellows. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Core Competencies for Diagnostic Radiology helped guide division leadership in restructuring and reframing breast imaging education during this time of drastic change and persistent uncertainty. Here, we reflect on the educational challenges and opportunities faced by our academic breast imaging division during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic across each of the ACGME Core Competencies. We also discuss how systems and processes developed out of necessity during the first peak of the pandemic may continue to support radiology training during phased reopening and beyond.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Internship and Residency , Radiology , Accreditation , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Education, Medical, Graduate , Humans , Pandemics , Radiology/education , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL