Breast symptoms among women enrolled in a health maintenance organization: Frequency, evaluation, and outcome

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 130, Issue 8, 1999, Pages 651-657

  Barton, Mary B ^a,c   Elmore, Joann G ^a,b   Fletcher, Suzanne W ^a,b,d  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE   (United States)

^d Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER SCREENING; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYMPTOMATOLOGY;

EID: 0033586774     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-8-199904200-00005     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Dawson C. Armstrong MW, Michaels J, Faber RG. Breast disease and the general surgeon. II. Effect of audit on the referral of patients with breast problems. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1993;75:83-6.
2. Black WC, Nease RF it, Tosteson AN. Perceptions of breast cancer risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87:720-31.
3. Physician Insurers Association of America. Breast cancer study: June 1995. Washington, DC: Physician Insurers Association of America; 1995.
4. Mitnick JS, Vazquez MF, Kronovet SZ, Roses DF. Malpractice litigation involving patients with carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;181: 315-21.
5. Kern KA. Causes of breast cancer malpractice litigation. A 20-year civil court review. Arch Surg. 1992:127:542-7.
6. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, Polk S, Arena PJ, Fletcher SW. Ten-year risk of false positive screening marnmograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med. 199S;33S: 1089-96.
7. Barnett GO, Justice N, Somand M. COSTAR: A computer based medical information system for ambulatory care. Proceedings of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. 1979,67:1226-37.
8. American Medical Association. Physicians' Current Procedural Terminology: CPT '95. Chicago, IL: American Medical Assoc; 1994.
9. Medicare program; revisions to payment policies and five-year review of and adjustment to the relative value units under the physician fee schedule for calendar year 1997-HCFA. Final rule with comment period. Fed Regist. 1996; 61:59490-724.
10. MapMarker 2.0: Desktop Mapping Software. Troy, NY: Maplnfo Corporation; 1995.
11. SAS. Version 6.10. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Inc; 1996.
12. Roberts MM, Elton RA, Robinson SE, French K. Consultations for breast 2disease in general practice and hospital referral patterns. Br J Surg. 1987;74: 1020-2.
13. Bywaters JL. The incidence and management of female breast disease in a general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1977;27:353-7.
14. Nichols S, Waters WE, Wheeler MJ. Management of female breast disease by Southampton general practitioners. Br Wed J. 1980:281:1450-3.
15. Standertskjold-Nordenstam CG. Svinhufvud U. Mammography of symptomatic breasts. A report on 1119 consecutive patients. Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1980:69:48-53.
16. Sterns EE. Age-related breast diagnosis. Can J Surg. 1992:35:41-5.
17. Cochrane RA, Singhal H, Monypermy IJ, Webster DJ, Lyons K, Mansel RE. Evaluation of general practitioner referrals to a specialist breast clinic according to the UK national guidelines. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997:23:198-201.
18. Shaw AD, Gazet JC, Ford HT. The importance of the non-palpable lesion in women under 50, detected by mammography on self-referral for screening, symptoms or follow up. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1995:21:284-6.
19. Dawson C, Lancashire MJ, Reece-Smith H, Faber RG. Breast disease and the general surgeon. I. Referral of patients with breast problems. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1993:75:79-82.
20. Gui GP, Allum WH, Perry NM, Wells CA, Curling OM, McLean A, et al. One-stop diagnosis for symptomatic breast disease. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1995:77:24-7.
21. Preece PE, Mansel RE, Bolton PM, Hughes LM, Baum M, Gravelle IH. Clinical syndromes of mastalgia. Lancet. 1976:2:670-3.
22. McKinna JA, Davey JB, Walsh GA, A'Hern RP. Curling G, Frankland H. et al. The early diagnosis of breast cancer-a twenty-year experience at the Royal Marsden Hospital. Eur J Cancer. 1992;28A:911-6.
23. Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1994;271:703-7.
24. Salzmann P, Kerlikowske K, Phillips K. Cost-effectiveness of extending screening mammography guidelines to include women 40 to 49 years of age. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 127:955-65.
25. Healy BP. Breast cancer in the news: the rise of consumer power in medical care [Editorial]. J Womens Health. 1997;6:141-2.
26. The use of diagnostic tests for screening and evaluating breast lesions. Health and Public Policy Committee, American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 1985:103:143-6.
27. The periodic health examination: 2.1985 update. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. CMAJ. 1986:134:724-9.
28. 1989 survey of physicians' attitudes and practices in early cancer detection. CA Cancer J Clin. 1990:40:77-101.
29. Woo B, Woo B, Cook EF, Weisberg M, Goldman L Screening procedures in the asymptomatic adult. Comparisons of physicians' recommendations, patients' desires, published guidelines, and actual practice. JAMA. 1985:254: 1480-4.
30. Anderson LM, May DS. Has the use of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening increased in the United States? Am J Public Health. 1995; 85:840-2.
31. Self-reported use of mammography among women aged or = 40 yearsUnited States, 1989 and 1995. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1997;46:93741.
32. Pijnappcl RM, van Dalen A, Rinkes IH, van den Tweel JG, Mali WP. The diagnostic accuracy of core biopsy in palpable and non-palpable breast lesions. Eur J Radiol. 1997;24:120-3.
33. Ballo MS, Sneige N. Can core needle biopsy replace fine-needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of palpable breast carcinoma. A comparative study of 124 women. Cancer. 1996:78:773-7.
34. Gundry KR, Berg WA. Treatment issues and core needle breast biopsy: clinical context. AIR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:41-9.
35. Baker LH. Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report. CA Cancer J Clin. 1982;32:194-225.
36. Devitt JE. False alarms of breast cancer. Lancet. 1989:2:1257-8.
37. Moore FD. Breast self-examination [Editorial]. N Engl J Med. 1978:299:304-5.
38. Locker AP, Manhire AR, Stickland V, Caseldine J, Blarney RW. Mammography in symptomatic breast disease. Lancet. 1989:1:887-9.
39. Bernstein AB, Thompson GB, Harlan LC. Differences in rates of cancer screening by usual source of medical care. Data from the 1987 National Health Interview Survey. Med Care. 1991;29:196-209.
40. Newhouse JP, Manning WG, Morris CN, Orr LL, Duan N, Keeler EB, et al. Some interim results from a controlled trial of cost sharing in health insurance. N Engl J Med. 1981:305:1501-7.
41. Colditz GA, Willett WC, Hunter DJ, Stampfer MJ, Manson JE, Hennekens CH, et al. Family history, age, and risk of breast cancer. Prospective data from the Nurses' Health Study. JAMA. 1993:270:338-43.
42. Sattin RW, Rubin GU Webster LA, Huezo CM, Wingo PA, dry HW, et al. Family history and the risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 1985:253:1908-13.
43. Goodson WH 3d, Mailman R, Jacobson M, Hunt TK. What do breast symptoms mean? Am J Surg. 1985:150:271-4.
44. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). Reston, VA: American Coll Radiology; 1993.
45. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (Bl-RADS). 2d ed. Reston, VA: American Coll Radiology; 1995.
46. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Classman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographie features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:35-40.