Patient, Provider, and Practice Characteristics Predicting Use of Diagnostic Imaging in Primary Care: Cross-Sectional Data From the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To determine imaging utilization rates in outpatient primary care visits and factors influencing likelihood of imaging use. METHODS: We used 2013 to 2018 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey cross-sectional data. All visits to primary care clinics during the study period were included in the sample. Descriptive statistics on visit characteristics including imaging utilization were calculated. Logistic regression analyses evaluated the influence of a variety of patient-, provider-, and practice-level variables on the odds of obtaining diagnostic imaging, further subdivided by modality (radiographs, CT, MRI, and ultrasound). The data's survey weighting was accounted for to produce valid national-level estimates of imaging use for US office-based primary care visits. RESULTS: Using survey weights, approximately 2.8 billion patient visits were included. Diagnostic imaging was ordered at 12.5% of visits with radiographs the most common (4.3%) and MRI the least common (0.8%). Imaging utilization was similar or greater among minority patients compared with White, non-Hispanic patients. Physician assistants used imaging at higher rates than physicians, in particular CT at 6.5% of visits compared with 0.7% for doctors of medicine and doctors of osteopathic medicine (odds ratio 5.67, 95% confidence interval 4.07-7.88). CONCLUSION: Disparities in rates of imaging utilization for minorities seen in other health care settings were not present in this sample of primary care visits, supporting that access to primary care is a path to promote health equity. Higher rates of imaging utilization among advanced-level practitioners highlight an opportunity to evaluate imaging appropriateness and promote equitable, high-value imaging among all practitioners.

Fostering Patient-Centered Equitable Care in Radiology: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Patient-centered care (PCC) and equity are two of the six core domains of quality health care, according to the Institute of Medicine. Exceptional imaging care requires radiology practices to provide patient-centered (i.e., respectful and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values) and equitable (i.e., does not vary in quality on the basis of gender, ethnicity, geographic location, or socioeconomic status) care. Specific barriers that prevent the delivery of patient-centered equitable care include information gaps, breaches of trust, organizational medical culture, and financial incentives. Information gaps limit practitioners in understanding the lived experience of patients. Breaches of trust prevent patients from seeking needed medical care. Organizational medical cultures may not be centered around patient experiences. Financial incentives can impede practitioners' ability to spend the time and resources required to meet patient goals and needs. Intentional approaches that integrate core principles in both PCC and health equity are required to deliver high-quality patient-centered imaging care for diverse patient populations. The purpose of this AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review is to review the origins of the PCC movement in radiology, characterize connections between the PCC and health equity movements, and describe concrete examples of ways to foster patient-centered equitable care in radiology.

Impact of Health Care-Associated Cost Concerns on Mammography Utilization: Cross-Sectional Survey Results From the National Health Interview Survey.

PURPOSE: Health care-related cost concerns and financial toxicity are increasingly recognized barriers along the breast cancer care continuum. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between patient-reported cost concerns and screening mammography utilization. METHODS: Survey participants aged 40 to 74 years from the 2018 National Health Interview Survey without personal history of breast cancer were included (response rate: 64%). Respondents were queried if they had experienced specific access-related health care barriers. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between barriers to care and patient-reported screening mammography utilization. RESULTS: Of survey respondents, 7,511 women were included. Of this group, 68.9% reported receiving a screening mammogram within the last 2 years and 52.2% reported receiving a screening mammogram within the last year. Of all survey respondents, 48.4% reported worry paying medical bills. Patients who reported worry about paying medical bills (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-0.97; P = .01), challenges affording dental care (OR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.54-0.77; P < .01), and challenges affording eyeglasses (OR 0.67; 95% CI: 0.54-0.84; P < .01) were less likely to report screening mammography use than their respective counterparts. Patients who skipped medication doses (OR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.91; P < .01), took less medication, (OR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.48-0.82; P < .01), and delayed filling prescriptions (OR 0.71; 95% CI: 0.56-0.90; P < .01) to save money were also less likely to report receiving mammography screening. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported cost-related barriers are associated with decreased utilization of routine mammography.

Are English-language online patient education materials related to breast cancer risk assessment understandable, readable, and actionable?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the readability, understandability, and actionability of online patient education materials (OPEM) related to breast cancer risk assessment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We queried seven English-language search terms related to breast cancer risk assessment: breast cancer high-risk, breast cancer risk factors, breast cancer family history, BRCA, breast cancer risk assessment, Tyrer-Cuzick, and Gail model. Websites were categorized as: academic/hospital-based, commercial, government, non-profit or academic based on the organization hosting the site. Grade-level readability of qualifying websites and categories was determined using readability metrics and generalized estimating equations based on written content only. Readability scores were compared to the recommended parameters set by the American Medical Association (AMA). Understandability and actionability of OPEM related to breast cancer high-risk were evaluated using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) and compared to criteria set at ≥70%. Descriptive statistics and inter-rater reliability analysis were utilized. RESULTS: 343 websites were identified, of which 162 met study inclusion criteria. The average grade readability score was 12.1 across all websites (range 10.8-13.4). No website met the AMA recommendation. Commercial websites demonstrated the highest overall average readability of 13.1. Of the 26 websites related to the search term breast cancer high-risk, the average understandability and actionability scores were 62% and 34% respectively, both below criteria. CONCLUSIONS: OPEM on breast cancer risk assessment available to the general public do not meet criteria for readability, understandability, or actionability. To ensure patient comprehension of medical information online, future information should be published in simpler, more appropriate terms.

Patient Sociodemographic Characteristics Associated With Saturday Breast Imaging Clinic Utilization.

OBJECTIVE: To determine patient sociodemographic characteristics associated with breast imaging utilization on Saturdays to inform potential initiatives designed to improve access and reduce disparities in breast cancer care. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved retrospective cross-sectional study. All adult women (aged ≥18 years) who received a screening or diagnostic examination at our breast imaging facility from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017 were included. Patient characteristics including age, race, primary language, partnership status, insurance status, and primary care physician status were collected using the electronic medical record. Multiple variable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate patient characteristics associated with utilization. RESULTS: Of 53 695 patients who underwent a screening examination and 10 363 patients who underwent a diagnostic examination over our study period, 9.6% (5135/53 695) and 2.0% (209/10 363) of patients obtained their respective examination on a Saturday. In our multiple variable logistic regression analyses, racial/ethnic minorities (odds ratio [OR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-1.6; P < 0.01) and women who speak English as a second language (OR, 1.1; 95% CI: 1.0-1.3; P = 0.03) were more likely to obtain their screening mammogram on Saturday than their respective counterparts. CONCLUSION: Racial/ethnic minorities and women who speak English as a second language were more likely to obtain their screening mammogram on Saturdays than their respective counterparts. Initiatives to extend availability of breast imaging exams outside of standard business hours increases access for historically underserved groups, which can be used as a tool to reduce breast cancer-related disparities in care.

Analysis of the Effects of a Patient-Centered Rideshare Program on Missed Appointments and Timeliness for MRI Appointments at an Academic Medical Center.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the differences in timeliness to MRI appointments and missed MRI appointment rates before and after the implementation of a rideshare program. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a rideshare program was performed 9 months after implementation to compare the effects before and after implementation. Variables obtained included demographics, MRI appointment variables, and data related to rideshare use. Descriptive statistics and linear and logistic regression analyses were used to compare demographic characteristics among patients using the rideshare program with (1) those who did not use the rideshare program after implementation and (2) patients before rideshare implementation. Rates of missed appointments derived from patient-related, same-day appointment cancellations were analyzed using logistic regression analyses. Timeliness was analyzed using linear regression analyses. All analyses were adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of 7,707 patients scheduled for MRI appointments during the postintervention period, 151 patients used the rideshare service (1.95%). There were no statistically significant differences in missed appointment rates after rideshare implementation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.27; P = .275). Patients using the rideshare service were more likely to be on time (adjusted coefficient = 13.0; 95% confidence interval, 5.4-20.5; P = .001). Older patients (P = .001), unemployed patients (P < .001), and patients without commercial insurance (P < .001) were more likely to use the rideshare service. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a rideshare program did not significantly decrease missed appointment rates, but it significantly improved timeliness to MRI appointments while assisting at-risk patient populations reporting transportation barriers.

Impact of a Same-Day Breast Biopsy Program on Disparities in Time to Biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in breast cancer diagnosis are established. In usual practice, biopsies are performed days or weeks after recommendation. Our aim was to measure the impact of a same-day biopsy program on disparities in time from biopsy recommendation to performance. METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval, we identified all diagnostic examinations leading to biopsy pre- (September 2016 to March 2017) and post- (September 2017 to March 2018) implementation of our same-day biopsy program. We compared demographic characteristics (age, race, language, and insurance) and biopsy information (days from biopsy recommendation to biopsy, and proportion of same-day biopsies in all biopsies) in pre- versus postimplementation groups. Multivariable linear and logistic models in pre- and postimplementation groups assessed if days from biopsy recommendation to biopsy and having a same-day biopsy were associated with patient subgroups. RESULTS: In all, 663 and 482 patients underwent biopsy during pre- and postimplementation periods, respectively. Patient subgroups were similar between periods. For all patients, the same-day biopsy program decreased median time from diagnostic examination to biopsy from 8 (interquartile range: 4-13) to 0 (interquartile range: 0-4) days (P < .001). During the pre-implementation period, nonwhite patients and having Medicare insurance were associated with longer days to biopsy (nonwhite Adjusted Coefficient: 2.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-4.03; insurance Adjusted Coefficient: 2.47, 95% CI: 0.58-4.37; P < .05), after adjustment. During the postimplementation period, the previously seen disparities did not persist (nonwhite Adjusted Coefficient: -0.416, 95% CI: -2.16-1.33; insurance Adjusted Coefficient: 0.812, 95% CI: -1.18-2.80; P > .05). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of racial/ethnic or insurance disparities in time from biopsy recommendation to performance after implementation of a same-day biopsy program.

Implementation of an Intimate Partner Violence Screening Assessment and Referral System in an Academic Women's Imaging Department.

PURPOSE: One in five US women report that they have been victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) during their lifetime. With millions of women presenting for mammography every year, breast imaging centers may represent ideal venues to identify women at risk for IPV and refer them to appropriate support services. Our purpose was to evaluate implementation of a novel IPV screening and referral system for women presenting for mammography. METHODS: A question was added to intake questionnaire ("Do you feel safe in your home?") for adult women presenting for screening or diagnostic mammography from 2016 to 2017 at our hospital outpatient breast imaging sites. The proportion of women presenting for screening or diagnostic mammogram who felt unsafe was calculated. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to compare baseline characteristics of women who stated that they felt unsafe at home versus women who did not state that they felt unsafe at home. RESULTS: In all, 99,029 examinations were performed (68,158 unique patients). Of these patients, 71 stated that they felt unsafe at home (71 of 68,158, 0.1%). Women presenting for their first mammogram were more likely to report feeling unsafe at home (odds ratio 3.03, 95% confidence interval 1.31-7.06, P = .01). No differences were found in age (P = .148), ethnicity (P = .271), gravida (P = .676), parity (P = .752), age at menarche (P = .775), and history of breast cancer (P = .726). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of a screening and referral system for IPV in radiology departments.

Impact of Primary Care Physician Interaction on Longitudinal Adherence to Screening Mammography Across Different Racial/Ethnic Groups.

PURPOSE: Regular contact with a primary care physician (PCP) is associated with increased participation in screening mammography. Older studies suggested that PCP interaction may have a smaller effect on screening mammography uptake among racial and ethnic minorities compared with whites, but there is limited contemporary evidence about the effect of PCP interaction on screening mammography uptake across different racial and ethnic groups. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between PCP contact and longitudinal adherence with screening mammography guidelines over a 10-year period across different racial/ethnic groups. METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant and institutional review board-approved retrospective single-institution study included women between the ages of 50 and 64 years who underwent screening mammography in the calendar year of 2005. The primary outcome of interest was adherence to recommended screening mammography guidelines (yes or no) at each 2-year interval from their index screening mammographic examination in 2005 until 2015. Patients were defined as having a high level of PCP interaction if their PCPs were listed in the electronic medical record within the top three providers with whom the patients had the most visits during the study period. Generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate the effect of high PCP interaction on screening mammography adherence while adjusting for correlated observations and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Patients in the high PCP interaction group had increased longitudinal adherence to recommended screening mammography (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-1.73; P < .001). This was observed in stratified analyses for all self-reported racial groups, including white (adjusted OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.36-1.68; P < .001), black (adjusted OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.31-2.86; P = .001), Hispanic (adjusted OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.27-2.87; P = .002), Asian (adjusted OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.01-2.39; P = .045), and other (adjusted OR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.32-3.56; P = .002), with no evidence of effect modification by race/ethnicity (P = .342). Medicaid (adjusted OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31-0.53) and self-pay or other (adjusted OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.56) insurance categories were associated with decreased longitudinal adherence to recommended screening mammography (P < .001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: High levels of PCP interaction result in similar improvements in longitudinal screening mammography adherence for all racial/ethnic minority groups. Future efforts will require targeted outreach to assist Medicaid and uninsured patient populations overcome barriers to screening mammography adherence.

Addressing Potential Health Disparities in the Adoption of Advanced Breast Imaging Technologies.

With the advent of new screening technologies, including digital breast tomosynthesis, screening ultrasound, and breast magnetic resonance imaging, there is growing concern that existing disparities among traditionally underserved populations will worsen. These newer screening modalities purport improved cancer detection over mammography alone but are not offered at all screening facilities and often require a larger co-pay or out-of-pocket expense. Thus, the potential for worsening disparities with regard to access and appropriate utilization of supplemental screening technologies exists. Currently, there is a dearth of literature on the topic of health disparities related to access and the use of supplemental breast cancer screening and their impact on outcomes. Identifying and addressing explanatory factors for persistent and potentially worsening disparities remain a central focus of efforts to improve equity in breast cancer care. Therefore, this paper provides an overview of factors that may contribute to present and future disparities in breast cancer screening and outcomes, and explores specific relevant topics requiring greater research efforts as more personalized, multimodality breast cancer screening approaches are adopted into clinical practice.

Patient Access to Online Radiology Reports: Frequency and Sociodemographic Characteristics Associated with Use.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate the frequency with which patients viewed their online radiology reports in relation to clinical and laboratory notes and identify sociodemographic factors associated with report viewing. METHOD AND MATERIALS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 129,419 patients who had online patient portal access in our large health system in 2014. We determined whether patients viewed their radiology reports, laboratory reports, and clinical notes. We also collected patient sociodemographic information including gender, age, primary spoken language, race/ethnicity, and insurance status. We performed multivariate analyses to determine significant associations between viewing of radiology reports and viewing of other types of clinical reports and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of 61,131 patients with at least one radiology report available, 31,308 (51.2%) viewed them. Patients who also viewed laboratory reports or clinical notes were significantly more likely to view their radiology reports (P < 0.001). Women (56.2%), patients 25-39 years old (59.5%), and English speakers (53.6%) were most likely to view radiology reports. In multivariate analysis, Asian-Americans were more likely and African-Americans were less likely to view their radiology reports compared to whites (OR = 1.07 and OR = 0.39, respectively; P < 0.001 for both). Patients with Medicaid were less likely to view radiology reports compared to patients with commercial insurance (OR = 0.38, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: More than half of patients with access to online radiology reports viewed them, with higher viewing rates associated with viewing other types of reports and lower rates associated with characteristics of traditionally underserved patient populations.