title: Factors associated with adequacy of diagnostic workup after abnormal breast cancer screening results.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Women with certain characteristics, such as those residing in rural areas, are less likely screened for breast cancer. To enhance detection of early breast cancer, it is imperative that all women who have abnormal screening results receive appropriate diagnostic procedures. This study reports differences in receipt of diagnostic services following abnormal screening results.
  
  
  METHODS
  Screening and diagnostic data were collected as part of a breast and cervical cancer early detection program aimed at reaching women of lower socioeconomic status. Women with completed diagnostic information after having abnormal screening results were included. We based adequacy of diagnostic services on guidelines from the Society for Surgical Oncology, The Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Several factors were assessed for their association with adequacy of diagnostic follow-up: income, age, race, education, health insurance status, rural-urban residence, reported breast lump, family history of breast cancer, and clinical beast examination or mammogram results.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Overall, 14.1% of the 351 abnormal findings were considered inadequately followed up based on the algorithm used. Eighty percent involved an abnormal finding on a clinical breast examination regardless of the mammogram results. Rural women, those with abnormal clinical breast examination findings but normal or equivocal findings on mammograms, and those who self-discovered a mass were less likely to receive adequate follow-up than were their counterparts in multivariate analysis. Rural women were less likely to receive a biopsy or fine-needle aspiration, although it was indicated. One facility accounted for most of the inadequate follow-up screenings among urban women.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Women who have specific demographic and clinical characteristics were less likely to have received adequate diagnostic services. Breast cancers could have been missed initially as a result of inappropriate follow-up. Further investigation of the clinical scenarios using chart reviews is warranted.
authors.affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, and The Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Louis, MO, USA.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Schootman
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Myers-Geadelmann
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Fuortes
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D001707:Biopsy, Needle; D001940:Breast / Q000473:pathology; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D003954:Diagnostic Services; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008327:Mammography; D008403:Mass Screening; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D010808:Physical Examination; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011446:Prospective Studies; D019035:Rural Health Services; D012923:Social Class; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis