Methods of compliance with mammography quality standards act regulations for tracking positive mammograms: Survey results

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 172, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 691-696

  Birdwell, Robyn L ^a   Ikeda, Debra M ^a   Brenner, R James ^b,c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b SAINT JOHN'S HEALTH CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL RECORD; MENTAL COMPLIANCE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0033036829     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.172.3.10063862     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Mammography quality standards: rules and regulations (CFR 900). Federal Register October 28, 1997;62:55852-55994
2. Mammography quality standards: proposed rules (CFR 900). Federal Register. April 3, 1996;61: 14856-14920
3. Liu S, Bassett LW, Sayre J. Women's attitudes about receiving mammographic results directly from radiologists. Radiology 1994;193:783-786
4. Bassett LW, Bomyea K, Liu S, Sayre J. Communication of mammography results to women by radiologists: attitudes of referring health care providers. Radiology 1995;195:235-238
5. Townsend v Turk, 266 Cal Rptr 821, 218 Cal App 3d 278 (1990)
6. Slanetz PJ, Moore RH, Hulka CA, et al. Physicians' opinions on the delivery of mammographic screening services: immediate interpretation versus double reading. AJR 1996;167:377-379
7. Rimer BK, Keintz MK, Kessler HB, Engstrom PF, Rosan JR. Why women resist screening mammography: patient-related barriers. Radiology 1989;172:243-246
8. Monsees BS, Skinner CS. Screening mammography. In: Bassett LW, Jackson VP, Jahan R, Fu YS, Gold RH, eds. Diagnosis of diseases of the breast. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1997:317-328
9. Brenner RJ. Mammography and malpractice litigation: current status, lessons, and admonitions. AJR 1993;161:931-935
10. Pal S, Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL. Compliance with recommended follow-up after fine-needle aspiration biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: a retrospective study. Radiology 1996;201:71-74
11. Goodman KA, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM. Compliance with recommended follow-up after percutaneous breast core biopsy. AJR 1998;170:89-92
12. Pisano ED, Yankaskas B, Ghate S, Morgan J, Plankey M. Patient compliance with radiologist recommendations in mobile screening mammography in rural North Carolina. Acad Radiol 1995; 12:1067-1072
13. Berlin L. Tracking for breast cancer. AJR 1998; 170:93-95
14. Helvie MA, Penes DR, Rebner M, Adler DD. Mammographic follow-up of low-suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield. Radiology 1991;178:155-158
15. Wright JE. The history of surgical audit. J Qual Clin Pract 1995;15:81-88
16. Sunshine JH, Bansal S. Professional and business characteristics of radiology groups in the United States: 1992. Radiology 1995;194:365-371
17. Bassett LW, Henrik RE, Bassford TL. High-quality mammography: information for referring providers. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research no. 95-0633. Rockville, MD: United States Department of Health and Human Services, 1994
18. 1998 MQSA final rule released. ACR Bull December 1997;53:14-18
19. Sickles EA. The usefulness of computers in managing the operation of a mammography screening practice. AJR 1990;155:755-761
20. Monticciolo DL, Sickles EA. Computerized follow-up of abnormalities detected at mammography screening. AJR 1990;155:751-753
21. Sickles EA. Quality assurance: how to audit your own mammography practice. Radiol Clin North Am 1992;30:265-275
22. Linver MN, Osuch JR, Brenner RJ, Smith RA. The mammography audit: a primer for the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA). AJR 1995;165:19-25
23. Physician Insurers Association of America. Breast cancer study. Washington, DC: Physician Insurers Association of America, 1995:3-27
24. Kessler HB. Managed care and the radiologist: expectations and future trends. AJR 1994;163:1-3