Current realities of delivering mammography services in the community: Do challenges with staffing and scheduling exist?

Radiology

Volumn 235, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 391-395

  D'Orsi, Carl ^a   Tu, Shin Ping ^b   Nakano, Connie ^b   Carney, Patricia A ^c   Abraham, Linn A ^d   Taplin, Stephen H ^d,h   Hendrick, R Edward ^e   Cutter, Gary R ^f   Berns, Eric ^e   Barlow, William E ^g   Elmore, Joann G ^b  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^e NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

^g Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^h NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNITY CARE; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; EQUIPMENT; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MAMMOGRAPHY; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW; SCREENING; UNITED STATES; WORK SCHEDULE;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DATA COLLECTION; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HEALTH FACILITIES; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HEALTH SERVICES NEEDS AND DEMAND; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; PERSONNEL STAFFING AND SCHEDULING; RADIOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY, RADIOLOGIC; UNITED STATES; WAITING LISTS;

EID: 20244384408     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2352040132     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. U.S. General Accounting Office. Mammography: capacity generally exists to deliver services. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office, 2002; 1-20.
2. Martinez B. Mammography centers shut down as reimbursement feud rages on. Wall Street Journal. October 30, 2000:A1.
3. Gorman C. Need a mammogram? it could take a while. Time 2001; 157:78, 81.
4. Jones DN. 2002 Australian radiology workforce report. Australas Radiol 2002; 46:231-248.
5. Sibbald B. Staffing crisis looms, radiologists warn. CMAJ 1999; 161:1433.
6. Carney PA, Poplack SP, Wells WA, Littenberg B. The New Hampshire Mammography Network: the development and design of a population-based registry. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167:367-372.
7. Carter AP, Thompson RS, Bourdeau RV, Andenes J, Mustin H, Straley H. A clinically effective breast cancer screening program can be cost-effective, too. Prev Med 1987; 16:19-34.
8. Taplin SH, Mandelson MT, Anderman C, et al. Mammography diffusion and trends in late-stage breast cancer: evaluating outcomes in a population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997; 6:625-631.
9. Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:1001-1008.
10. Feig SA. Economic challenges in breast imaging, a survivor's guide to success. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:843-852.
11. WWAMI Rural Health Research Center. The use of RUCAs in health care. Available at: www.fammed.washington.edu/wwamirhrc/. Updated December 2003. Accessed February 11, 2004.
12. Bassett LW, Monsees BS, Smith RA, et al. Survey of radiology residents: breast imaging training and attitudes. Radiology 2003; 227:862-869.
13. Sunshine JH, Maynard CD, Paros JT, Forman HP. Update on the diagnostic radiologist shortage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:301-305.
14. American Hospital Association. Workforce survey 2001. Washington, DC: American Hospital Association, 2001.
15. American Registry of Radiologic Technologists. Annual report of examinations: results of the 2001 examinations in radiology, nuclear medicine technology, and radiation therapy. St Paul, Minn: American Registry of Radiologic Technologists, 2001; 1-11.
16. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy people 2010: understanding and improving health. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000.