Skip Navigation LinksHome > April 2013 - Volume 51 - Issue 4 > Timeliness of Abnormal Screening and Diagnostic Mammography...
Medical Care:
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318280f04c
Original Articles

Timeliness of Abnormal Screening and Diagnostic Mammography Follow-up at Facilities Serving Vulnerable Women

Goldman, L. Elizabeth MD, MCR*; Walker, Rod MS; Hubbard, Rebecca PhD; Kerlikowske, Karla MD*; for the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium

Supplemental Author Material
Collapse Box

Abstract

Background: Whether timeliness of follow-up after abnormal mammography differs at facilities serving vulnerable populations, such as women with limited education or income, in rural areas, and racial/ethnic minorities is unknown.

Methods: We examined receipt of diagnostic evaluation after abnormal mammography using 1998–2006 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium-linked Medicare claims. We compared whether time to recommended breast imaging or biopsy depended on whether women attended facilities serving vulnerable populations. We characterized a facility by the proportion of mammograms performed on women with limited education or income, in rural areas, or racial/ethnic minorities.

Results: We analyzed 30,874 abnormal screening examinations recommended for follow-up imaging across 142 facilities and 10,049 abnormal diagnostic examinations recommended for biopsy across 114 facilities. Women at facilities serving populations with less education or more racial/ethnic minorities had lower rates of follow-up imaging (4%–5% difference, P<0.05), and women at facilities serving more rural and low-income populations had lower rates of biopsy (4%–5% difference, P<0.05). Women undergoing biopsy at facilities serving vulnerable populations had longer times until biopsy than those at facilities serving nonvulnerable populations (21.6 vs. 15.6 d; 95% confidence interval for mean difference 4.1–7.7). The proportion of women receiving recommended imaging within 11 months and biopsy within 3 months varied across facilities (interquartile range, 85.5%–96.5% for imaging and 79.4%–87.3% for biopsy).

Conclusions: Among Medicare recipients, follow-up rates were slightly lower at facilities serving vulnerable populations, and among those women who returned for diagnostic evaluation, time to follow-up was slightly longer at facilities that served vulnerable population. Interventions should target variability in follow-up rates across facilities, and evaluate effectiveness particularly at facilities serving vulnerable populations.

Copyright © 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Login

Article Tools

Share

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.