TY - JOUR
T1 - Patient satisfaction with the communication of mammographic results before and after the Mammography Quality Standards Reauthorization Act of 1998
AU - Priyanath, Aparna
AU - Feinglass, Joe
AU - Dolan, Nancy C.
AU - Haviley, Corinne
AU - Venta, Luz A.
PY - 2002
Y1 - 2002
N2 - OBJECTIVE. The goal of this study was to evaluate the difference in patient satisfaction, timeliness of reporting, patient recollection of recommendations, and patient anxiety before and after passage of the Mammography Quality Standards Reauthorization Act of 1998, which requires written notification of all mammographic results. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We used a telephone survey with sampling that was stratified to reflect patients with normal and abnormal findings who had screening and diagnostic mammograms. Patients with visits before the mandate became effective (April 1999, n = 298) and after (January 2000.n = 316) were interviewed about the average time to receive results, satisfaction with communication about results, anxiety, and perceived follow-up recommendations. Multiple logistic regression was used to test the association of time period with patient dissatisfaction, controlling for age, anxiety level (considerable or extreme vs none or moderate), examination type (screening vs diagnostic), and examination result (normal vs abnormal findings). RESULTS. No significant difference was found between periods in anxiety about results or agreement with documented radiology recommendations, but we found a substantial increase in the number of screening patients who reported timely receipt of results. Significantly fewer patients were dissatisfied with mammographic results communication after the mandate (multivariable odds ratio = 0.46, p = 0.006). Screening examination patients and patients who reported considerable or extreme anxiety about test results were more likely to be dissatisfied in both periods. CONCLUSION. By standardizing results notification, the Mammography Quality Standards Reauthorization Act improved patient satisfaction and reporting timeliness among screening examination patients, but did little to improve anxiety or recollection of recommendations. Future quality improvement efforts should focus on improving patients' understanding of followup recommendations.
AB - OBJECTIVE. The goal of this study was to evaluate the difference in patient satisfaction, timeliness of reporting, patient recollection of recommendations, and patient anxiety before and after passage of the Mammography Quality Standards Reauthorization Act of 1998, which requires written notification of all mammographic results. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We used a telephone survey with sampling that was stratified to reflect patients with normal and abnormal findings who had screening and diagnostic mammograms. Patients with visits before the mandate became effective (April 1999, n = 298) and after (January 2000.n = 316) were interviewed about the average time to receive results, satisfaction with communication about results, anxiety, and perceived follow-up recommendations. Multiple logistic regression was used to test the association of time period with patient dissatisfaction, controlling for age, anxiety level (considerable or extreme vs none or moderate), examination type (screening vs diagnostic), and examination result (normal vs abnormal findings). RESULTS. No significant difference was found between periods in anxiety about results or agreement with documented radiology recommendations, but we found a substantial increase in the number of screening patients who reported timely receipt of results. Significantly fewer patients were dissatisfied with mammographic results communication after the mandate (multivariable odds ratio = 0.46, p = 0.006). Screening examination patients and patients who reported considerable or extreme anxiety about test results were more likely to be dissatisfied in both periods. CONCLUSION. By standardizing results notification, the Mammography Quality Standards Reauthorization Act improved patient satisfaction and reporting timeliness among screening examination patients, but did little to improve anxiety or recollection of recommendations. Future quality improvement efforts should focus on improving patients' understanding of followup recommendations.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036150653&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036150653&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2214/ajr.178.2.1780451
DO - 10.2214/ajr.178.2.1780451
M3 - Article
C2 - 11804917
AN - SCOPUS:0036150653
SN - 0361-803X
VL - 178
SP - 451
EP - 456
JO - American Journal of Roentgenology
JF - American Journal of Roentgenology
IS - 2
ER -