Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34143286›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

Diagnostic interval for non-screening patients undergoing mammography during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Priscila Crivellaro, Monica Tafur, Ralph George, Derek Muradali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Breast cancer care amidst a pandemic: a scoping review to understand the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on health services and health outcomes.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Retrospective Study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Priscila CrivellaroDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Monica TafurDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Ralph GeorgeDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Derek MuradaliDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1W8, Canada. Derek.Muradali@unityhealth.to.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9567-8196

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a temporary cessation of mammography screening. However, in some facilities, diagnostic breast imaging services continued for patients with a high clinical suspicion of breast cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate changes in the diagnostic interval (DI) of non-screening patients presenting for diagnostic mammography during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsRetrospective chart review was performed on patients presenting for non-screening diagnostic mammography from April 1 to June 30, 2020 (pandemic group) and April 1 to June 30, 2019 (pre-pandemic group). Age, reason for referral, number and type of imaging studies/biopsies necessary for a final diagnosis were recorded. Diagnostic interval (DI) was defined as the number of days from the date of the diagnostic mammogram to the date of the final diagnosis.

resultsCompared to the pre-pandemic group (n = 64), the pandemic group (n = 77) showed a reduction in DI of the entire cohort (pandemic: 1 day; pre-pandemic: 15 days, p < 0.0001) for patients not requiring tissue sampling (pandemic: 1 day; pre-pandemic: 11 days, .p < 0.0001) and those requiring tissue sampling with benign pathology (pandemic 9 days; pre-pandemic, 33 days, p = 0.0002). A higher percentage of patients in the pandemic group had their assessment completed during the initial visit (pandemic: 50.6%; pre-pandemic: 23.4%, p = 0.0009).

conclusionDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the DI for patients with non-screening-related diagnostic mammography was significantly shorter, with a higher percentage of patients completing their assessments on the initial visit, compared to one year prior. KEY POINTS: • Despite reductions in manpower and clinical services, during pandemic times, it is possible to maintain a diagnostic breast imaging service for women at high clinical suspicion for breast cancer. • During pandemic times, breast imaging departments should consider restructuring to a Rapid Diagnostic Unit model with a navigation team that follows patients through the assessment process to a final diagnosis. • Departmental restructuring and patient navigation during pandemic times could either maintain or shorten the diagnostic interval for patients presenting for diagnostic mammography.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCOVID-19Early Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2BreastCOVID-19Diagnostic intervalMammogram

Identifiers

PMID34143286
PMCPMC8211559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.