Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal breast cancer screening mammograms in primary care: a systematic review
Loading...
Download
Associated Records
Authors
File Licence
Editors
Date
2021-12-01
Source Title
BMC Cancer
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
BMC
Affiliation
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health
General Practice
General Practice
Document Type
Journal Article
Subject Code
Citation
Reece, J. C., Neal, E. F. G., Nguyen, P., McIntosh, J. G. & Emery, J. D. (2021). Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal breast cancer screening mammograms in primary care: a systematic review. BMC Cancer, 21 (1), https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08100-3.
Access Status
Open Access
Access URL
Open Access URL
Open Access at PMC
Linked Resource URL
NHMRC Grant Code
ARC Grant Code
Description
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Successful breast cancer screening relies on timely follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Delayed or failure to follow-up abnormal mammograms undermines the potential benefits of screening and is associated with poorer outcomes. However, a comprehensive review of inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms in primary care has not previously been reported in the literature. This review could identify modifiable factors that influence follow-up, which if addressed, may lead to improved follow-up and patient outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature review to determine the extent of inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms in primary care and identify factors impacting on follow-up was conducted. Relevant studies published between 1 January, 1990 and 29 October, 2020 were identified by searching MEDLINE®, Embase, CINAHL® and Cochrane Library, including reference and citation checking. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were used to assess the risk of bias of included studies according to study design. RESULTS: Eighteen publications reporting on 17 studies met inclusion criteria; 16 quantitative and two qualitative studies. All studies were conducted in the United States, except one study from the Netherlands. Failure to follow-up abnormal screening mammograms within 3 and at 6 months ranged from 7.2-33% and 27.3-71.6%, respectively. Women of ethnic minority and lower education attainment were more likely to have inadequate follow-up. Factors influencing follow-up included physician-patient miscommunication, information overload created by automated alerts, the absence of adequate retrieval systems to access patient's results and a lack of coordination of patient records. Logistical barriers to follow-up included inconvenient clinic hours and inconsistent primary care providers. Patient navigation and case management with increased patient education and counselling by physicians was demonstrated to improve follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up of abnormal mammograms in primary care is suboptimal. However, interventions addressing amendable factors that negatively impact on follow-up have the potential to improve follow-up, especially for populations of women at risk of inadequate follow-up.