Pathologic findings in reduction mammoplasty specimens: a surrogate for the population prevalence of breast cancer and high-risk lesions.

PURPOSE: Mammoplasty removes random samples of breast tissue from asymptomatic women providing a unique method for evaluating background prevalence of breast pathology in normal population. Our goal was to identify the rate of atypical breast lesions and cancers in women of various ages in the largest mammoplasty cohort reported to date. METHODS: We analyzed pathologic reports from patients undergoing bilateral mammoplasty, using natural language processing algorithm, verified by human review. Patients with a prior history of breast cancer or atypia were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 4775 patients were deemed eligible. Median age was 40 (range 13-86) and was higher in patients with any incidental finding compared to patients with normal reports (52 vs. 39 years, p = 0.0001). Pathological findings were detected in 7.06% (337) of procedures. Benign high-risk lesions were found in 299 patients (6.26%). Invasive carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ were detected in 15 (0.31%) and 23 (0.48%) patients, respectively. The rate of atypias and cancers increased with age. CONCLUSION: The overall rate of abnormal findings in asymptomatic patients undergoing mammoplasty was 7.06%, increasing with age. As these results are based on random sample of breast tissue, they likely underestimate the prevalence of abnormal findings in asymptomatic women.

Medical Student Patient Outreach to Ensure Continuity of Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Yale New Haven Health System began rescheduling nonurgent outpatient appointments as virtual visits in March 2020. While Yale New Haven Health expanded its telemedicine infrastructure to accommodate this shift, many appointments were delayed and patients faced considerable uncertainty. Objective: Medical students created the Medical Student Task Force (MSTF) to help ensure continuity of care by calling patients whose appointments were delayed during this transition to telemedicine. Methods: Eighty-five student volunteers called 3765 internal medicine patients with canceled appointments, completing screening for 2197 patients. Volunteers screened for health care needs, assessed preferences for future appointments, and offered emotional support and information about COVID-19. Urgent or emergent patient concerns were triaged and escalated to providers. In this analysis, we used a mixed-methods approach: call information and provider responses were analyzed quantitatively, and patient feedback was analyzed qualitatively via thematic analysis. Results: Ninety-one percent of patients screened found the MSTF calls helpful. Twenty-one percent of patients reported health concerns, with 1% reporting urgent concerns escalated to and addressed by providers. Themes of patient comments included gratitude for outreach and social contact, utility of calls, and well-wishes for health care workers. Conclusions: By calling patients whose appointments had been canceled during a rapid transition to telemedicine, the MSTF helped bridge a potential gap in care by offering patients communication with their care teams, information, and support. We propose that this model could be used in other care systems urgently transitioning to outpatient telemedicine, whether during ongoing outbreaks of COVID-19 or other public health emergencies.