Premium
Mammography facilities serving vulnerable women have longer follow‐up times
Author(s) -
Karliner Leah S.,
Kaplan Celia,
LivaudaisToman Jennifer,
Kerlikowske Karla
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
health services research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.706
H-Index - 121
eISSN - 1475-6773
pISSN - 0017-9124
DOI - 10.1111/1475-6773.13083
Subject(s) - medicine , mammography , cancer registry , odds ratio , odds , breast cancer , population , stage (stratigraphy) , cancer , family medicine , logistic regression , environmental health , paleontology , biology
Objective To investigate mammography facilities’ follow‐up times, population vulnerability, system‐based processes, and association with cancer stage at diagnosis. Data Sources Prospectively collected from San Francisco Mammography Registry ( SFMR ) 2005‐2011, California Cancer Registry 2005‐2012, SFMR facility survey 2012. Study Design We examined time to biopsy for 17 750 abnormal mammogram results ( BI ‐ RADS 4/5), categorizing eight facilities as short or long follow‐up based on proportion of mammograms with biopsy at 30 days. We examined facility population vulnerability (race/ethnicity, language, education), and system processes. Among women with a cancer diagnosis, we modeled odds of advanced‐stage (≥ II b) cancer diagnosis by facility follow‐up group. Data Extraction Methods Merged SFMR , Cancer Registry and facility survey data. Principal Findings Facilities (N = 4) with short follow‐up completed biopsies by 30 days for 82% of mammograms compared with 62% for facilities with long follow‐up (N = 4) ( P < 0.0001). All facilities serving high proportions of vulnerable women were long follow‐up facilities. The long follow‐up facilities had fewer radiologists, longer biopsy appointment wait times, and less communication directly with women. Having the index abnormal mammogram at a long follow‐up facility was associated with higher adjusted odds of advanced‐stage cancer ( OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.10‐1.91). Conclusions Providing mammography facilities serving vulnerable women with appropriate resources may decrease disparities in abnormal mammogram follow‐up and cancer diagnosis stage.