Timeliness of Breast Diagnostic Imaging and Biopsy in Practice: 15 Years of Collecting, Comparing, and Defining Quality Breast Cancer Care.


Journal

Annals of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1534-4681
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9420840

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Historique:
received: 01 05 2023
accepted: 23 06 2023
medline: 12 9 2023
pubmed: 2 8 2023
entrez: 1 8 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The literature lacks well-established benchmarks for expected time between screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging and then to core needle breast biopsy. Timeliness of diagnostic imaging workup was evaluated using aggregate data from 2005 to 2019 submitted to The National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC). A total of 419 breast centers submitted data for 1,805,515 patients on the time from screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging. The overall time was 7 days with 75th, 25th, and 10th percentile values of 5, 10, and 13.5 days, respectively. The average time in business days decreased from 9.1 to 7.1 days (p < 0.001) over the study period with the greatest gains in poorest-performing quartiles. Screening centers and centers in the Midwest had significantly shorter time to diagnostic imaging. Time from diagnostic imaging to core needle biopsy was submitted by 406 facilities representing 386,077 patients. The average time was 6 business days, with 75th, 25th, and 10th percentiles of 4, 9, and 13.7 days, respectively. Time to biopsy improved from a mean of 9.0 to 6.3 days (p < 0.001) with the most improvement in the poorest-performing quartiles. Screening centers, centers in the Midwest, and centers in metropolitan areas had significantly shorter time to biopsy. In a robust dataset, the time from screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging and from diagnostic imaging to biopsy decreased from 2005 to 2019. On average, patients could expect to have diagnostic imaging and biopsies within 1 week of abnormal results. Monitoring and comparing performance with reported data may improve quality in breast care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The literature lacks well-established benchmarks for expected time between screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging and then to core needle breast biopsy.
METHODS METHODS
Timeliness of diagnostic imaging workup was evaluated using aggregate data from 2005 to 2019 submitted to The National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC).
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 419 breast centers submitted data for 1,805,515 patients on the time from screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging. The overall time was 7 days with 75th, 25th, and 10th percentile values of 5, 10, and 13.5 days, respectively. The average time in business days decreased from 9.1 to 7.1 days (p < 0.001) over the study period with the greatest gains in poorest-performing quartiles. Screening centers and centers in the Midwest had significantly shorter time to diagnostic imaging. Time from diagnostic imaging to core needle biopsy was submitted by 406 facilities representing 386,077 patients. The average time was 6 business days, with 75th, 25th, and 10th percentiles of 4, 9, and 13.7 days, respectively. Time to biopsy improved from a mean of 9.0 to 6.3 days (p < 0.001) with the most improvement in the poorest-performing quartiles. Screening centers, centers in the Midwest, and centers in metropolitan areas had significantly shorter time to biopsy.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
In a robust dataset, the time from screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging and from diagnostic imaging to biopsy decreased from 2005 to 2019. On average, patients could expect to have diagnostic imaging and biopsies within 1 week of abnormal results. Monitoring and comparing performance with reported data may improve quality in breast care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37528305
doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13905-6
pii: 10.1245/s10434-023-13905-6
pmc: PMC10495489
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

6070-6078

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Hewitt M, Simone JV. Ensuring quality cancer care. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1999.
Bleicher RJ, Ruth K, Sigurdson ER, et al. Time to surgery and breast cancer survival in the united states. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(3):330–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.4508 .
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.4508 pubmed: 26659430 pmcid: 4788555
Hanna TP, King WD, Thibodeau S, et al. Mortality due to cancer treatment delay: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;371:m4087. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4087 .
doi: 10.1136/bmj.m4087 pubmed: 33148535
Kupstas AR, Hoskin TL, Day CN, et al. Effect of surgery type on time to adjuvant chemotherapy and impact of delay on breast cancer survival: a National Cancer Database Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;20(10):3240–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07566-7 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07566-7
Mayo RC III, Parikh JR. Breast imaging: the face of imaging 3.0. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(8):1003–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.03.010 pubmed: 27162041
Weldon CB, Friedenwald SM, Kulkarni SA. Radiology as the point of cancer patient and care team engagement: applying the 4R model at a patient’s breast cancer care initiation. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(1 Pt 12):1579–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.09.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.09.008 pubmed: 27888945 pmcid: 5127438
Landercasper J, Linebarger JH, Ellis RL, et al. A quality review of the timeliness of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment in an integrated breast center. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(4):449–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.01.015 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.01.015 pubmed: 20347737
Rauscher GH, Tossas-Milligan T, Macarol T, Grabler PM, Murphy AM. Trends in attaining mammography quality benchmarks with repeated participation in a quality measurement program: going beyond the Mammography Quality Standards Act to address breast cancer disparities. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17(11):1420–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2020.07.019 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.07.019 pubmed: 32771493 pmcid: 8035910
Miller ME, Bleicher RJ, Kaufman CS, et al. Impact of breast center accreditation on compliance with breast quality performance measures at Commission on Cancer- accredited centers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:1202–11. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-07108-7 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-07108-7 pubmed: 30684159
Quan LM, Shumak RS, Majpruz V, Holloway CMD, O’Malley FP, Chiarelli AM. Improving work-up of the abnormal mammogram through organized assessment: results from the Ontario Breast Screening Program. J Oncol Pract. 2012;8:107–12. https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.211.000413 .
doi: 10.1200/JOP.211.000413 pubmed: 23077438 pmcid: 3457814
Richardson LC, Royalty J, Howe W, Helsel W, Kammerer W, Benard VB. Timeliness of breast cancer diagnosis and initiation of treatment in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1996–2005. Am J Publ Health. 2010;100:1769–75. https://doi.org/10.2015/AJPH.2009.160184 .
doi: 10.2015/AJPH.2009.160184
Kaufman CS, Shockney L, Rabinowitz, et al. National quality measures for breast centers (NQMBC): a robust quality tool: breast center quality measures. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:377–85. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0729-5 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0729-5 pubmed: 19834768
Rosenthal MB, Frank RG, Li A, Epstein AM. Early experience with pay-for-performance: from concept to practice. JAMA. 2005;294:1788–93.
doi: 10.1001/jama.294.14.1788 pubmed: 16219882
Edge SB. The NCCN guidelines program and opportunities for quality improvement. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2014;12(Suppl 1):S1-4.
doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2014.0204
Liederback E, Sisco M, Wang C, et al. Wait times for breast surgical operations. 2003–2011: a report from the National Cancer Data Base. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:899–907.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4086-7
Saint-Jacques N, Younis T, Dewar R, Rayson D. Wait times for breast cancer care. Br J Cancer. 2007;96:162–8.
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603523 pubmed: 17179986
Polverini AC, Nelson RA, Marcinkowski E, et al. Time to treatment: measuring quality breast cancer care. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(10):3392–402. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5486-7 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5486-7 pubmed: 27503492
Drageset S, Lindstrøm TC, Underlid K. Coping with breast cancer: between diagnosis and surgery. J Adv Nurs. 2010;66(1):149–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05210.x2010 .
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05210.x2010 pubmed: 20423441
Heckman BD, Fisher EB, Monsees B, Merbaum M, Ristvedt S, Bishop C. Coping and anxiety in women recalled for additional diagnostic procedures following an abnormal screening mammogram. Health Psychol. 2004;23(1):42–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.23.1.42 .
doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.23.1.42 pubmed: 14756602
Rimer BK, Bluman LG. The psychosocial consequences of mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;22:131–8.
doi: 10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.131
Bret J, Austoker J, Onc G. Do women who undergo further investigation for breast screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? A multi-center follow-up study comparing different breast screening result groups five months after their last breast screening appointment. J Pub Health Med. 2001;23:292–300.
Bekeny JC, Luvisa K, Wirth P, et al. Critical evaluation of factors contributing to time to mastectomy within a single health care system. Breast J. 2020;26(9):1702–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13953 .
doi: 10.1111/tbj.13953 pubmed: 32656954
Menashe I, Anderson WF, Jatoi I, Rosenberg PS. Underlying causes of the black-white racial disparity in breast cancer mortality: a population-based analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(14):993–1000.
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp176 pubmed: 19584327 pmcid: 2710374
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vital signs: racial disparities in breast cancer severity—United Stages, 2005–2009. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61:922–6.
Eaglehous YL, Georg MW, Shriver CD, Zhu K. Racial differences in time to breast cancer surgery and overall survival in the US military health system. JAMA Surg. 2019;154(3):e185113.
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.5113
Sheppard VA, Oppong BA, Hampton R, et al. Disparities in breast cancer surgery delay: the lingering effect of race. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(9):2902–29011.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4397-3 pubmed: 25652051
Walsh RL, Lofters A, Moineddin R, Kryzanowska M, Grunfeld E. Primary care continuity and wait times to receiving breast cancer chemotherapy: a population-based retrospective cohort study using CanIMPACT data. Curr Oncol. 2021;28:4786–804. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28060405 .
doi: 10.3390/curroncol28060405 pubmed: 34898582 pmcid: 8628668
Valente S, Al-Hilli Z, Liu Y, Greve N, Tu C, Grobmyer SR. Association of patient factors with time to treatment for breast cancer. Breast J. 2020;26(10):1995–2001. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.14046 .
doi: 10.1111/tbj.14046 pubmed: 32924203
Kvasnovsky CL, Kesmodel AB, Gargasin JL, et al. Expansion of screening mammography in the Veterans Health Administration: implications for breast cancer treatment. JAMA Surg. 2013;148(11):999–1004. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3738 .
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3738 pubmed: 24048217
Casey JT, Berkowitz L, Cashy J, Wichramasinghe N, Schaeffer A, Gonzalez C. A protocol based, electronic medical record enabled care coordination system improves the timeliness and efficiency of care for patients with hematuria. J Urol. 2013;190(1):212–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.018 .
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.018 pubmed: 23321584
Laws A, Crocker A, Dort J, et al. Improving wait times and patient experience through implementation of a provincial expedited diagnostic pathway for BI-RADS 5 breast lesions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(10):3361–7. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07558-7 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07558-7 pubmed: 31342368
Richards M, Anderson M, Carter P, et al. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care. Nat Cancer. 2020;1:565–7.
doi: 10.1038/s43018-020-0074-y pubmed: 35121972 pmcid: 7238956
Morrill K, Robles-Morales R, Lopez-Pentacost M, et al. Factors associated with cancer treatment delay: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e061121. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061121 .
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061121 pubmed: 35768104 pmcid: 9240873

Auteurs

Cory Amanda Donovan (CA)

Surgical Oncology, Legacy Health, Portland, OR, USA. cdonova@lhs.org.

Cary S Kaufman (CS)

Department of Surgery, Bellingham Regional Breast Center, University of Washington, Bellingham, WA, USA.

Kari A Thomas (KA)

Pacific Imaging Associates, Legacy Good Samaritan Breast Health Center, Portland, OR, USA.

Ayfer Kamali Polat (AK)

Department of General Surgery, Ondokuz Mayis University, Samsun, Turkey.

Marguerite Thomas (M)

Oncology Program, Penrose-St Francis Cancer Center, Colorado Springs, CO, USA.

Bonnie Mack (B)

The Breast Center at Portsmouth Regional Hospital, Portsmouth, NH, USA.

Ariel Gilbert (A)

National Consortium of Breast Centers, Warsaw, IN, USA.

Terry Sarantou (T)

Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH