Breast imaging flow models

Journal of the American College of Radiology

Volumn 1, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 265-269

  Parikh, Jay R ^a  

^a SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast imaging; Efficiency; Flow models; Organization

Indexed keywords

BREAST EXAMINATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGIST; REVIEW;

EID: 84928096658     PISSN: 15461440     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2003.12.048     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Tabar L, Vitak B, Hsiu-Hsi T.C, et al. Beyond randomized control trials organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast carcinoma mortality. Cancer. 91:2001;1724-1731
2. Parikh J.R. Components of a breast-care center. Decis Imaging Econ. 15:(8):2002;39-46
3. Destouet J.M, Sheman M.L. The impact of mammography regulations on breast imaging practice costs. Sem Breast Dis. 4:2001;10-14
4. Parikh J.R. Breast center model puts emphasis on patients. Diagn Imaging. 24:(4 suppl):2002;15-19
5. Thurfjell E, Lernewall K.A, Taube A.A.S. Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology. 191:1994;241-244
6. Legler J, Meissner H.I, Coyne C, et al. The effectiveness of interventions to promote mammography among women with historically lower rates of screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prevent. 11:2002;59-71
7. Brustrom J.E, Hunter D.C. Going the distance how far will women travel to undergo free mammography? Military Med. 166:2001;347-349
8. Rimer B.K, Keintz M.K, Kessler H.B, et al. Why women resist screening mammography patient-related barriers. Radiology. 172:1989;243-246
9. Lindfors K.L, O'Connor J.O, Parker R.A. False-positive screening mammograms effect of immediate versus later work-up on patient stress. Radiology. 218:2001;247-253
10. Barton M.B, Moore S, Polk S, et al. Increased patient concern after false-positive mammograms; clinician documentation and subsequent ambulatory visits. J Gen Intern Med. 16:2001;150-156
11. Rimer B.K, Bluman L.G. The psychosocial consequences of mammography. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst. 22:1997;131-138
12. Cardenosa G, Eklund G.W. Rate of compliance with recommendations for additional views and biopsies. Radiology. 181:1991;359-361
13. Pisano E.D, Yankaskas B.C, Ghate S.V, et al. Patient compliance in mobile screening mammography. Acad Radiol. 2:1995;1067-1072
14. Zavertnik J.J, McCoy C.B, Robinson D, et al. Cost-effective management of breast cancer. Cancer. 69:1992;1979-1984
15. Rice B. Why some doctors get sued more than others. Med Econ. 80:(13):2003;73-77
16. Forster H.P, Schwartz J, DeRenzo E. Reducing legal risk by practicing patient-centered medicine. [comment] Arch Intern Med. 162:(22):2002;2630-2631
17. Saxton J.W. How to increase economic returns and reduce liability exposure part 1 - patient satisfaction as an economic tool. J Med Pract Manage. 17:(3):2001;142-144
18. Stewart M, Brown J.B, Boon H, et al. Evidence on patient-doctor communication. Cancer Prevent Control. 3:(1):1999;25-30
19. Wilson T.E, Wallace C, Roubidoux M.A, et al. Patient satisfaction with screening mammography online versus off-line interpretation. Acad Radiol. 5:1998;771-778
20. Schreiber M.H, Leonard M, Rieniets C.Y. Disclosure of imaging findings to patients directly by radiologists survey of patients' preferences. Am J Roentgenol. 165:1995;467-469
21. Liu S, Bassett L.W, Sayre J, et al. Women's attitudes about receiving mammographic results directly from radiologists. Radiology. 193:1994;783-786
22. Dolan N.C, Feinglass J, Priyanath A, et al. Measuring satisfaction with mammography results reporting. J Gen Intern Med. 16:2001;157-162
23. Hulka C.A, Slanetz P.J, Halpern E.F, et al. Patients' opinion of mammography services immediate results versus delayed results due to interpretation by two observers. Am J Roentgenol. 168:1997;1085-1089
24. Physician Insurers Association of America. Breast Cancer Study, 2002. 2002;Physician Insurers of America, Rockville (MD)
25. Logan-Young W. The breast imaging center; successful management in today's environment. Radiol Clin North Am. 38:(4):2000;853-860
26. Raza S, Rosen M.P, Chorny K, et al. Patient expectations and costs of immediate reporting screening mammography talk isn't cheap. Am J Roentgenol. 177:2001;579-583
27. Feig S.A. Economic challenges in breast imaging a survivor's guide to success. Radiol Clin North Am. 38:(4):2000;843-852
28. Parikh J.R, McInerney K. A capital budget proposal for ultrasound. Decis Imaging Econ. 15:(11):2002;95-100
29. Enzmann D.R, Anglada P.M, Haviley C, et al. Providing professional mammography services financial analysis. Radiology. 219:2001;469-473
30. Karsh J. Diagnostic challenges in osteoporosis. Indications for bone densitometry and establishing secondary causes. Can Fam Physician. 47:2001;1244-1250
31. Blake G.M, Fogelman I. Bone density and the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Sem Nucl Med. 31:(1):2001;69-81
32. Cohen L, Fishman D.A. Ultrasound and ovarian cancer. Cancer Treat Res. 107:2002;119-132
33. Sato S, Yokoyama Y, Sakamoto T, et al. Usefulness of mass screening for ovarian carcinoma using transvaginal ultrasonography. Cancer. 89:2000;582-588
34. American College of Radiology. ACR standard for the performance of diagnostic mammography. 2003;American College of Radiology, Reston (VA)
35. Lee C.Z. Oncopolitical issues obstacles and options for success in a comprehensive breast center. Surg Oncol Clin North Am. 9:2000;279-294