AJR ARRS Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Monticciolo, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Sickles, E. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Monticciolo, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Sickles, E. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 155, 751-753, Copyright © 1990 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Computerized follow-up of abnormalities detected at mammography screening

DL Monticciolo and EA Sickles
Department of Radiology, University of California School of Medicine, San Francisco 94143.

Obtaining follow-up information after abnormal interpretations is an important aspect of a mammography practice, but it can be tedious, time- consuming, and produce suboptimal results. This study demonstrates the effect of computer-generated reminders on the collection of follow-up data for patients in whom abnormalities were detected at mammography screening. From April 1985 until December 1987, follow-up data for 1009 abnormal examinations were collected by using standard procedures, supplemented by occasional searches of pathology records and sporadic letters and telephone calls to referring physicians. Results showed that follow-up was limited to a normal physical examination in 104 women (10.3%); eight other women (0.8%) were lost to follow-up. For over 90% of these inadequately followed cases, referring physicians were first contacted more than 3 months after screening. Since December 1987, follow-up data for 777 abnormal examinations were collected, supplemented by computer-generated reminders sent to referring physicians for cases apparently unresolved 3 months after screening. Only four (0.5%) of these women have had inadequate follow-up (normal physical examination alone). We conclude that use of a computer- generated reminder system prompts more timely and more appropriate patient management. It also makes follow-up data collection much less onerous.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Med Care Res RevHome page
K. R. Yabroff, K. S. Washington, A. Leader, E. Neilson, and J. Mandelblatt
Is the Promise of Cancer-Screening Programs Being Compromised? Quality of Follow-Up Care after Abnormal Screening Results
Med Care Res Rev, September 1, 2003; 60(3): 294 - 331.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
K. Kerlikowske, P. A. Carney, B. Geller, M. T. Mandelson, S. H. Taplin, K. Malvin, V. Ernster, N. Urban, G. Cutter, R. Rosenberg, et al.
Performance of Screening Mammography among Women with and without a First-Degree Relative with Breast Cancer
Ann Intern Med, December 5, 2000; 133(11): 855 - 863.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.