Search

Objective Although the Affordable Care Act eliminated cost sharing for screening mammography, a concern is that grandfathered plans, diagnostic mammograms, and follow-up testing may still lead to out-of-pocket (OOP) spending. Our study examines how OOP spending among women at their baseline screening mammogram may impact the decision to receive subsequent screening. Methods The study included commercially insured women aged 40 to 41 years with a screening mammogram between 2011 and 2014. We estimated multivariate linear probability models of the effect of OOP spending at the baseline mammogram on subsequent screening 12 to 36 months later. Results Having any OOP payments for the baseline screening mammogram significantly reduced the probability of screening in the subsequent 12 to 24 months by 3.0 percentage points (pp) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-4.8 pp decrease). For every $100 increase in the OOP expenses for the baseline mammogram, the likelihood of subsequent screening within 12 to 24 months decreased by 1.9 pp (95% CI: 0.8-3.1 pp decrease). Similarly, any OOP spending for follow-up tests resulting from the baseline screening led to a 2.7 pp lower probability of screening 12 to 24 months later (95% CI: 0.9-4.1 pp decrease). Higher OOP expenses were associated with significantly lower screening 24 to 36 months later (coefficient = −0.014, 95% CI: −0.025 to −0.003). Discussion Although cost sharing has been eliminated for screening mammograms, OOP costs may still arise, particularly for diagnostic and follow-up testing services, both of which may reduce rates of subsequent screening. For preventive services, reducing or eliminating cost sharing through policy and legislation may be important to ensuring continued adherence to screening guidelines.

Introduction Many states have mandated breast density notification and insurance coverage for additional screening; yet, the association between such legislation and stage of diagnosis for breast cancer is unclear. This study investigates this association and examines the differential impacts among different age and race/ethnicity subgroups. Methods The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried to identify patients with breast cancer aged 40–74 years diagnosed between 2005 and 2016. Using a difference-in-differences multinomial logistic model, the odds of being diagnosed at different stages of cancer relative to the localized stage depending on legislation and individual characteristics were examined. Analyses were conducted in 2020–2021. Results The study included 689,641 cases. Overall, the impact of notification legislation was not significant, whereas insurance coverage legislation was associated with 6% lower odds (OR=0.94, 95% CI=0.91, 0.96) of being diagnosed at the regional stage. The association between insurance coverage legislation and stage of diagnosis was even stronger among women aged 40–49 years, with 11% lower odds (OR=0.89, 95% CI=0.82, 0.96) of being diagnosed at the regional stage and 12% lower odds (OR=0.88, 95% CI=0.81, 0.96) of being diagnosed at the distant stage. Hispanic women benefited from notification laws, with 11% lower odds (OR=0.89, 95% CI=0.82, 0.97) of being diagnosed at distant stage. Neither notification nor supplemental screening insurance coverage legislation showed a substantial impact on Black women. Conclusions The findings imply that improving insurance coverage is more important than being notified overall. Raising awareness is important among Hispanic women; improving communication about dense breasts and access to screening might be more important than legislation among Black women.

Rationale and Objectives An increase in the administrative work in our healthcare system has led to an increase in the number of administrative positions in radiology departments. Many of these are Vice Chair roles, including Vice Chair for Education (VCEd). The responsibility of this position has expanded, often far beyond the original definition. This article defines the role and expectations of the Vice Chair for Education and provides suggestions for success. Materials and Methods This article will review 12 vital roles that a Vice Chair for Education must play to be an effective advocate for radiology education within a department. Results Key attributes of an educational leader are delineated, divided into 12 areas or roles. Conclusion This article summarizes key leadership skills needed by Vice Chairs for Education in order for them to be effective in their role.

Medical errors have a significant impact on patient care, worker safety, and health care finances. Breast imaging has the most common cause of organ-related misdiagnosis subject to malpractice suits. In order to effectively develop strategies to prevent errors, breast imaging radiologists must first understand the underlying causes of the errors that occur in the breast imaging setting. Errors in breast imaging can be related to errors in interpretation, improper workup of imaging findings, procedural errors, or errors in communication to the patient or other medical staff. The Yorkshire contributory factors framework was developed to identify factors that contribute to the errors in a hospital setting and can be adapted for use in the breast imaging setting. Within this framework, active failures refer to errors that directly affect the patient. Active errors include slips (including biases), lapses, and mistakes. The framework describes how active errors often result from factors that occur uphill from these active errors at different levels within the system. Once error causes are understood, there are concrete strategies and tools that breast imaging radiologists can implement to decrease adverse events, reduce medical errors, and promote a safety environment in the breast imaging clinic. Error mitigation tools can be summarized using the acronym SAFE, which includes support the team, ask questions, focus on a task, and effectively communicate/ensure equipment optimization/safe environment. Knowledge of errors commonly seen in a breast imaging clinic represent an opportunity for constructive changes and, ultimately, improved health care delivery.

Background A Radiology Research Alliance Task Force was assembled in 2018 to review the literature on peer review and report on best practices for peer learning and peer coaching. Findings This report provides a historical perspective on peer review and the transition to peer collaborative learning and peer coaching. Most forms of current peer review have fulfilled regulatory requirements but have failed to significantly impact quality improvement or learning opportunities. Peer learning involves joint intellectual efforts by two or more individuals to study best practices and review error collaboratively. Peer coaching is a process in which individuals in a trusted environment work to expand, refine, and build new skills in order to facilitate self-directed learning and professional growth. We discuss the value in creating opportunities for peer learning and peer coaching. Conclusion Peer collaborative learning combined with peer coaching provides opportunities for teams to learn and grow together, benefit from each other's expertise and experience, improve faculty morale, and provide more opportunities for collaborations between faculty.

Unlike other modalities in breast imaging, breast ultrasound is very operator dependent. Proper characterization and management of breast lesions depends on the knowledge and skill of the radiologist performing the exam. Breast ultrasound optimization continues to evolve as the technology of ultrasound machines improves. The American College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) program requirements for graduate medical education in diagnostic radiology recently updated requirements to include competency in ultrasound physics, knobology, and image generation. As trainees are held to high ultrasound optimization standards, practicing radiologists who perform breast ultrasound exams must keep up to date on current breast ultrasound optimization techniques to avoid mischaracterizing and mismanaging breast ultrasound findings. In this paper, ultrasound optimization techniques, including patient positioning, transducer frequency, transducer contact and pressure, depth, gain, focus, tissue harmonic imaging, spatial compounding, dynamic range, speed of sound imaging, Doppler evaluation, and elastography will be described. Multiple ultrasound case examples will be used to illustrate application of these skills. After reading this paper, the reader will be able to apply these techniques to their own breast ultrasound practice, improving characterization and management of breast lesions in their patients.