Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Measuring satisfaction with mammography results reporting

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess factors associated with patient satisfaction with communication of mammography results and their understanding and ability to recall these results.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional telephone survey.

SETTING: Academic breast imaging center.

PATIENTS: Two hundred ninety-eight patients who had either a screening or diagnostic mammogram.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Survey items assessed waiting time for results, anxiety about results, satisfaction with several components of results reporting, and patients’ understanding of results and recommendations. Women undergoing screening exams were more likely to be dissatisfied with the way the results were communicated than those who underwent diagnostic exams and received immediate results (20% vs 11%, P=.05). For these screening patients, waiting for more than two weeks for notification of results, difficulty getting in touch with someone to answer questions, low ratings of how clearly results were explained, and considerable or extreme anxiety about the results were all independently associated with dissatisfaction with the way the results were reported, while age and actual exam result were not.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing screening mammograms were more likely to be dissatisfied with the way the results were communicated than were those who underwent diagnostic mammograms. Interventions to reduce the wait time for results, reduce patients’ anxiety, and improve the clarity with which the results and recommendations are given may help improve overall satisfaction with mammography result reporting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cockburn J, Hill D, De Luise T, et al. Satisfaction of attenders during the establishment of an Australian mammography screening program. Aust J Public Health. 1993;17:103–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lerman C, Rimer B, Trock B. Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screeing. Prev Med. 1990;19:279–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Loeken K, Steine S, Sandvik L. A new instrument to measure patient satisfaction with mammography, Validity, reliability, and discriminatory power. Med Care. 1997;35:731–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Quality Mammography Standards; Final Rule. Federal Register, Volume 62, p. 55852–994, October 28, 1997.

  5. D’Orsi CJ, Basset LW, Feig SA, et al. Breast imaging reporting data systems (BI-RADS). 3rd ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cockburn J, Hill D, Irwig L, et al. Development and validation of an instrument to measure satisfaction of participants at breast screening programes. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27:287–31.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bakker DA, Lightfoot NE, Steggles S, et al. The experience and satisfaction of women attending breast cancer screening. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1998;25:115–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Farria DM, Fox SA, Ganz P, et al. Women’s communication preferences and experiences in mammography. Radiology. 1998;209:392.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy C. Dolan MD.

Additional information

This study was funded in part by a grant from the Coleman Foundation to the Northwestern University Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dolan, N.C., Feinglass, J., Priyanath, A. et al. Measuring satisfaction with mammography results reporting. J GEN INTERN MED 16, 157–162 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2001.00509.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2001.00509.x

Key words

Navigation