Linked claims and medical records for cancer case management: Evaluation of mammography abnormalities

Cancer

Volumn 110, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 518-524

  Eberl, Margaret M ^a   Watroba, Nancy ^a,b   Reinhardt, Marc ^c   Pomerantz, Jay ^c   Serghany, Joseph ^d   Broffman, Gregory ^d   Fox, Chester H ^a   Mahoney, Martin C ^b   Edge, Stephen B ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^b ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c Univera Health   (United States)

^d Lifetime Healthcare Companies Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Administrative claims; Breast cancer; Follow up; Mammograms

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REIMBURSEMENT;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INSURANCE CLAIM REVIEW; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL RECORD LINKAGE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE;

EID: 34547134204     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22808     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Malin JL, Schuster MA, Kahn KA, Brook RH. Quality of breast cancer care: what do we know? J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:4381-4393.
2. Fox CH, Mahoney MC. Improving diabetes preventive care in a family practice residency program: a case study in continuous quality improvement. Fam Med. 1998;30:441-445.
3. Michielutte R, Sharp PC, Foley KL, et al. Intervention to increase screening mammography among women 65 and older. Health Educ Res. 2005;20:149-162.
4. Cleghorn GD, Nguyen M, Roberts B, Duran G, Tellez T, Alecon M. Practice-based interventions to improve health care for Latinos with diabetes. Ethn Dis. 2004;14(3 suppl 1):S117-S121.
5. Mehler PS, Krantz MJ, Lundgren RA, et al. Bridging the quality gap in diabetic hyperlipidemia: a practice-based intervention. Am J Med. 2005;118:1414.
6. Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Stange KC, Dennis LK, Amini SB, Rimm AA. The sensitivity of Medicare claims data for case ascertainment of six common cancers. Med Care. 1999;37:436-444.
7. Koroukian SM, Cooper GS, Rimm AA. Ability of Medicaid claims data to identify incident cases of breast cancer in the Ohio Medicaid population. Health Serv Res. 2003;38:947-960.
8. Arndt V, Sturmer T, Stegmaier C, Ziegler H, Dhom G, Brenner H. Patient delay and stage of diagnosis among breast cancer patients in Germany-a population based study. Br J Cancer. 2002;86:1034-1040.
9. Kothari A, Fentiman IS. Diagnostic delays in breast cancer and impact on survival. Int J Clin Pract. 2003;57:200-203.
10. Richards MA, Westcombe AM, Love SB, Littlejohns P, Ramirez AJ. Influence of delay on survival in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review. Lancet. 1999;353:1119-1126.
11. Haas JS, Cook EF, Puopolo AL, Burstin HR, Brennan TA. Differences in the quality of care for women with an abnormal mammogram or breast complaint. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:321-328.
12. Strzelczyk JJ, Dignan MB. Disparities in adherence to recommended followup on screening mammography: interaction of sociodemographic factors. Ethn Dis. 2002;12:77-86.
13. Kopans D, D'Orsi C, Adler D. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 1998.
14. Eberl MM, Fox CH, Edge SB, Carter CA, Mahoney MC. BI-RADS classification for management of abnormal mammograms. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19:161-164.
15. Poplack SP, Tosteson AN, Grove MR, Wells WA, Carney PA. Mammography in 53,803 women from the New Hampshire mammography network. Radiology. 2000;217:832-840.
16. Dresser MV, Feingold L, Rosenkranz SL, Coltin KL. Clinical quality measurement. Comparing chart review and automated methodologies. Med Care. 1997;35:539-552.
17. Butler Nattinger A, Schapira MM, Warren JL, Earle CC. Methodological issues in the use of administrative claims data to study surveillance after cancer treatment. Med Care. 2002;40(8 suppl):IV-69-IV-74.
18. Penberthy L, McClish D, Manning C, Retchin S, Smith T. The added value of claims for cancer surveillance: results of varying case definitions. Med Care. 2005;43:705-712.
19. Roos LL, Walld R, Wajda A, Bond R, Hartford K. Record linkage strategies, outpatient procedures, and administrative data. Med Care. 1996;34:570-582.
20. Monsees BS. The Mammography Quality Standards Act. An overview of the regulations and guidance. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000;38:759-772.
21. Henry RA, Stanton MP. Case management process improvement protocol: transcribing an initial summary for the oncology geriatric patient in a rural satellite office. Lippincotts Case Manag. 2005;10:234-239.
22. Butler WM, Cunningham JE, Bull D, et al. Breast cancer care: changing community standards. J Healthc Qual. 2004;26:22-28.
23. Delaronde S. Using case management to increase antiinflammatory medication use among a managed care population with asthma. J Asthma. 2002;39:55-63.
24. Martin DC, Berger ML, Anstatt DT, et al. A randomized controlled open trial of population-based disease and case management in a Medicare Plus Choice health maintenance organization. Prev Chronic Dis. 2004;1:A05.
25. Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council of the National Academies. Assessing the Quality of Cancer Care: An Approach to Measurement in Georgia. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council of the National Academies; 2005.