Improving Wait Times and Patient Experience Through Implementation of a Provincial Expedited Diagnostic Pathway for BI-RADS 5 Breast Lesions
- 37 Downloads
Long diagnostic intervals following abnormal breast imaging (DI) cause patient anxiety and possibly poorer prognosis. This study evaluates the effect of a provincial diagnostic pathway for BI-RADS 5 lesions on wait times and the patient-reported experience (PRE).
With multidisciplinary input, we developed a pathway for BI-RADS 5 lesions featuring expedited biopsy, early surgical referral, and nurse (RN) navigator support. Key diagnostic intervals were captured prospectively and compared with a prepathway control cohort. PRE data were obtained from a voluntary survey.
1205 patients were managed on the BI-RADS 5 pathway with 797 primary care physicians, 57 imaging centers, and 2 regional breast programs participating. Median duration from DI to biopsy was 6 days, from biopsy to pathology report was 5 days, DI to surgical referral was 6 days, and DI to surgical consult was 21 days. Compared with 128 prepathway controls, median intervals from DI to surgical referral and consult were significantly improved (15 vs. 6 days, 26 vs. 21 days, p < 0.001). Amongst 294 women who completed the survey, 92% experienced ≥ 1 anxiety complaint during assessment; prompt surgical consultation and multiple features of RN support reduced anxiety, and wait time satisfaction was high (70%). Patient preferences varied for receiving biopsy results from a surgeon (57%) vs. another provider (43%).
A diagnostic pathway for BI-RADS 5 lesions reduced wait times and improved the patient experience through prompt surgical referral and RN navigator support. Differing preferences for receiving biopsy results emerged, and future iterations should incorporate individualized patient wishes.
No conflicts of interest to disclose.
- 2.Brett J, Bankhead C, Henderson B, Watson E, Austoker J. The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review. Psychoongology. 2005; 14(11): 917–38.Google Scholar
- 8.Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (2017). Breast cancer screening in Canada: monitoring and evaluation of quality indicators. Results Report, January 2011—December 2012. https://www.partnershipagainstcancer.ca/topics/breast-cancer-screening-quality-indicators-2017/. Accessed 9 Apr 2019.
- 10.Borugian MJ, Kan L, Chu CCY, Ceballos K, Gelmon KA et al. Facilitated “fast track” referral reduces time from abnormal screening mammogram to diagnosis. Can J Public Health. 2008; 99(4):252–6.Google Scholar
- 12.Psooy BJ, Schreuer D, Borgaonkar J, Caines JS. Patient navigation: improving timeliness in the diagnosis of breast abnormalities. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2004; 55(3):145–50.Google Scholar
- 13.Alberta Health Services (2019). Cancer Strategic Clinical Network. https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/scns/page7677.aspx. Accessed 9 Apr 2019.
- 15.Alberta Innovates (2010). ARECCI Ethics Screening Tool. http://aihealthsolutions.ca/arecci/screening. Accessed 21 Apr 2019.
- 16.Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (2014). Examining disparities in cancer control: a system performance special focus report. https://www.partnershipagainstcancer.ca/topics/disparities-in-cancer-control/. Accessed 9 Apr 2019.