Patient comprehension of breast pathology report terminology: The need for patient-centered resources.

BACKGROUND: As health care continues to evolve toward information transparency, an increasing number of patients have access to their medical records, including result reports that were not originally designed to be patient-facing. Previous studies have demonstrated that patients have poor understanding of medical terminology. However, patient comprehension of terminology specific to breast pathology reports has not been well studied. We assessed patient understanding of common medical terms found in breast pathology reports. METHODS: A survey was administered electronically to patients scheduled for a screening mammogram within a multisite health care system. Participants were asked to objectively define and interpret 8 medical terms common to breast biopsy pathology reports. Patient perception of the utility of various educational tools was also assessed. Demographic information including health literacy, education level, previous cancer diagnosis, and primary language was collected. RESULTS: In total, 527 patients completed the survey. Terms including "malignant" and "benign" were the most correctly defined at 80% and 73%, respectively, whereas only 1% correctly defined "high grade." Factors including race/ethnicity and education level were correlated with more correct scores. Patients preferred educational tools that were specific to their diagnosis and available at the time they were reviewing their results. CONCLUSION: Patient comprehension of common medical terminology is poor. Potential assumptions of understanding based on patient factors including education, past medical history, and occupation are misinformed. With the newly mandated immediate release of information to patients, there is a pressing need to develop and integrate educational tools to support patients through all aspects of their care.

Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a radiographic review.

PURPOSE: To provide a review of the etiology, clinical presentation, and imaging findings of superior mesenteric artery (SMA) syndrome. METHODS: A literature review of 24 relevant articles regarding SMA syndrome was performed. RESULTS: Clinicians and radiologists with a high index of suspicion based on symptomatology may pursue radiologic investigation in the form of upper gastrointestinal (GI) series and contrast-enhanced abdominal computed tomography (CT). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) are less commonly utilized modalities in the work-up of SMA syndrome, but provide imaging alternatives without the use of ionizing radiation. Imaging can assist in diagnosis by demonstrating characteristic findings of reduced aortomesenteric angle, reduced aortomesenteric distance, gastroduodenal distention, bowel caliber narrowing at the takeoff of the superior mesenteric artery from the aorta, as well as delayed gastric emptying or positional obstruction observed with real time with fluoroscopy. CONCLUSION: SMA syndrome is a rare disease that can go unrecognized and undiagnosed, exacerbating weight loss in an already significantly malnourished patient population. The diagnosis of SMA syndrome must be based on clinical symptomatology correlated with radiographic information. Once diagnosed, SMA syndrome can be safely treated by conservative measures although occasionally requires invasive intervention in the form of enteral tube placement, percutaneous jejunostomy tube placement, total parenteral nutrition, ligament of Treitz lysis, or duodenojejunostomy.