Evaluation of existing patient educational materials and development of a brochure for women with dense breasts.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
In this pilot study, we developed and assessed acceptability of a brochure for women with dense breasts.Material and methods
We measured Flesch-Kincaid Readability of 22 existing breast density educational materials. We then developed a brochure and tested it in two populations of women: 44 safety net hospital patients and 13 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium stakeholders.Results
Average grade score of existing materials was 10.0 (range: 5.5-12.7). Our brochure had a grade score of 5.9, and patients reported it was easy to understand.Conclusion
Our plain language brochure could improve patient understanding following mandatory dense breast notification.
SUBMITTER: Warner ET
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7110420 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Biologically active CAM may detrimentally interfere with chemotherapy treatment, so cancer patients require targeted, evidence-based information on chemotherapy-CAM integration consequences. The object of this study was to investigate the potential for medical doctor recommendation and patient acceptance of a purpose-designed patient educational brochure on the safe use of CAM with chemotherapy. Cancer care doctors (n = 17) were provided a draft version of a patient educational brochure developed by the authors and completed a structured feedback form. Cancer patients receiving treatment (n = 12) were provided with the brochure and completed the local health service consumer testing feedback form. All 17 doctors perceived a need for the brochure and all would recommend the brochure to their patients. Approximately 59% of the doctors indicated they would recommend the brochure to all patients receiving chemotherapy and 41% preferred that only patients using CAM or who enquired about CAM be given the brochure. Cancer patients receiving chemotherapy reported that the brochure information answered their questions and was easy to understand. This evidence-based CAM-chemotherapy patient brochure may be a useful adjunct for use by cancer care health professionals to educate patients on the potential dangers of biologically active CAM use with chemotherapy and to provide patients with safe CAM alternatives.
| S-EPMC4352944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: To compare the diagnostic efficacy of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and ultrasound across breast densities in women recalled for assessment. Methods: A total of 482 women recalled for assessment from January 2017 to December 2019 were selected for the study. Women met the inclusion criteria if they had undergone DBT, ultrasound and had confirmed biopsy results. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and AUC for DBT and ultrasound. Results: In dense breasts, DBT showed significantly higher sensitivity than ultrasound (98.2% vs. 80%; p < 0.001), but lower specificity (15.4% vs. 55%; p < 0.001), PPV (61.3% vs. 71%; p = 0.04) and AUC (0.568 vs. 0.671; p = 0.001). In non-dense breasts, DBT showed significantly higher sensitivity than ultrasound (99.2% vs. 84%; p < 0.001), but no differences in specificity (22% vs. 33%; p = 0.14), PPV (69.2% vs. 68.8%; p = 0.93) or AUC (0.606 vs. 0.583; p = 0.57). Around 73% (74% dense and 71% non-dense) and 77% (81% dense and 72% non-dense) of lesions assigned a RANZCR 3 by DBT and ultrasound, respectively, were benign. Conclusion: DBT has higher sensitivity, but lower specificity and PPV than ultrasound in women with dense breasts recalled for assessment. Most lesions rated RANZCR 3 on DBT and ultrasound are benign and may benefit from short interval follow-up rather than biopsy.
| S-EPMC9222054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Twenty-one states have laws requiring that women be notified if they have dense breasts and that they be advised to discuss supplemental imaging with their provider.To better direct discussions of supplemental imaging by determining which combinations of breast cancer risk and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density categories are associated with high interval cancer rates.Prospective cohort.Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) breast imaging facilities.365,426 women aged 40 to 74 years who had 831,455 digital screening mammography examinations.BI-RADS breast density, BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk, and interval cancer rate (invasive cancer ?12 months after a normal mammography result) per 1000 mammography examinations. High interval cancer rate was defined as more than 1 case per 1000 examinations.High interval cancer rates were observed for women with 5-year risk of 1.67% or greater and extremely dense breasts or 5-year risk of 2.50% or greater and heterogeneously dense breasts (24% of all women with dense breasts). The interval rate of advanced-stage disease was highest (>0.4 case per 1000 examinations) among women with 5-year risk of 2.50% or greater and heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts (21% of all women with dense breasts). Five-year risk was low to average (0% to 1.66%) for 51.0% of women with heterogeneously dense breasts and 52.5% with extremely dense breasts, with interval cancer rates of 0.58 to 0.63 and 0.72 to 0.89 case per 1000 examinations, respectively.The benefit of supplemental imaging was not assessed.Breast density should not be the sole criterion for deciding whether supplemental imaging is justified because not all women with dense breasts have high interval cancer rates. BCSC 5-year risk combined with BI-RADS breast density can identify women at high risk for interval cancer to inform patient-provider discussions about alternative screening strategies.National Cancer Institute.
| S-EPMC4443857 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWomen with dense breast are known to be at high risk for breast cancer, but their prevalence and number of Korean women are unknown. The current study was to investigate the distribution of mammographic breast density by age of women undergoing screening mammography, and to estimate the prevalence of Korean women with dense breasts, quantitatively.Materials and methodsFor obtaining a nationwide representative sample, 6,481 mammograms were collected from 86 screening units participated in the National Cancer Screening Program for breast cancer. Based on the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System classification, breast density was evaluated by six breast radiologists, qualitatively. We applied these breast density distributions to age-specific counts of the Korean women population derived to mid-year 2017 to estimate the number of Korean women with dense breasts.ResultsOverall, 54.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.9% to 55.8%) of women 40 to 69 years of age had heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts, and this proportion was inversely associated with age. Based on the age distribution of Korean women, we estimated that 6,083,000 women (95% CI, 5,919,600 to 6,245,600) age 40-69 years in Korean have dense breasts. Women aged 40-49 years (n=3,450,000) accounted for 56.7% of this group.ConclusionMore than half of Korean women aged 40 and over have dense breasts. To prevent breast cancer effectively and efficiently, it is necessary to develop a new personalized prevention strategy considering her status of breast density.
| S-EPMC6790853 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMammography is not effective in detecting breast cancer in dense breasts.MethodsA search in Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE and Google Scholar databases was conducted from January 1, 1980 to April 10, 2019 to identify women with dense breasts screened by mammography (M) and/or ultrasound (US). Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.ResultsA total of 21 studies were included. The pooled sensitivity values of M alone and M + US in patients were 74% and 96%, while specificity of the two methods were 93% and 87%, respectively. Screening sensitivity was significantly higher in M + US than M alone (risk ratio: M alone vs. M + US = 0.699, P < 0.001), but the slight difference in specificity was statistically significant (risk ratio = 1.060, P = 0.001). Pooled diagnostic performance of follow-up US after initial negative mammography demonstrated a high pooled sensitivity (96%) and specificity (88%). The findings were supported by subgroup analysis stratified by study country, US method and timing of US.ConclusionsBreast cancer screening by supplemental US among women with dense breasts shows added detection sensitivity compared with M alone. However, US slightly decreased the diagnostic specificity for breast cancer. The cost-effectiveness of supplemental US in detecting malignancy in dense breasts should be considered additionally.
| S-EPMC7434777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Develop a computer-aided detection method and investigate its feasibility for detection of breast cancer in automated 3D ultrasound images of women with dense breasts.The HIPAA compliant study involved a dataset of volumetric ultrasound image data, "views," acquired with an automated U-Systems Somo●V(®) ABUS system for 185 asymptomatic women with dense breasts (BI-RADS Composition/Density 3 or 4). For each patient, three whole-breast views (3D image volumes) per breast were acquired. A total of 52 patients had breast cancer (61 cancers), diagnosed through any follow-up at most 365 days after the original screening mammogram. Thirty-one of these patients (32 cancers) had a screening-mammogram with a clinically assigned BI-RADS Assessment Category 1 or 2, i.e., were mammographically negative. All software used for analysis was developed in-house and involved 3 steps: (1) detection of initial tumor candidates, (2) characterization of candidates, and (3) elimination of false-positive candidates. Performance was assessed by calculating the cancer detection sensitivity as a function of the number of "marks" (detections) per view.At a single mark per view, i.e., six marks per patient, the median detection sensitivity by cancer was 50.0% (16/32) ± 6% for patients with a screening mammogram-assigned BI-RADS category 1 or 2--similar to radiologists' performance sensitivity (49.9%) for this dataset from a prior reader study--and 45.9% (28/61) ± 4% for all patients.Promising detection sensitivity was obtained for the computer on a 3D ultrasound dataset of women with dense breasts at a rate of false-positive detections that may be acceptable for clinical implementation.
| S-EPMC3874062 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe internet has become an increasingly popular resource among sports medicine patients seeking injury-related information. Numerous organizations recommend that patient educational materials (PEMs) should not exceed sixth-grade reading level. Despite this, studies have consistently shown the reading grade level (RGL) of PEMs to be too demanding across a range of surgical specialties.PurposeTo determine the readability of online sports medicine PEMs.Study designCross-sectional study.MethodsThe readability of 363 articles pertaining to sports medicine from 5 leading North American websites was assessed using 8 readability formulas: Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level, Flesch Reading Ease Score, Raygor Estimate, Fry Readability Formula, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Coleman-Liau Index, FORCAST Readability Formula, and Gunning Fog Index. The mean RGL of each article was compared with the sixth- and eighth-grade reading level in the United States. The cumulative mean website RGL was also compared among individual websites.ResultsThe overall cumulative mean RGL was 12.2 (range, 7.0-17.7). No article (0%) was written at a sixth-grade reading level, and only 3 articles (0.8%) were written at or below the eighth-grade reading level. The overall cumulative mean RGL was significantly higher than the sixth-grade [95% CI for the difference, 6.0-6.5; P < .001] and eighth-grade (95% CI, 4.0-4.5; P < .001) reading levels. There was a significant difference among the cumulative mean RGLs of the 5 websites assessed.ConclusionSports medicine PEMs produced by leading North American specialty websites have readability scores that are above the recommended levels. Given the increasing preference of patients for online health care materials, the imperative role of health literacy in patient outcomes, and the growing body of online resources, significant work needs to be undertaken to improve the readability of these materials.
| S-EPMC9082750 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening combined with ultrasound (US) with those of digital mammography (DM) combined with US in women with dense breasts.Materials and methodsA retrospective database search identified consecutive asymptomatic women with dense breasts who underwent breast cancer screening with DBT or DM and whole-breast US simultaneously between June 2016 and July 2019. Women who underwent DBT + US (DBT cohort) and DM + US (DM cohort) were matched using 1:2 ratio according to mammographic density, age, menopausal status, hormone replacement therapy, and a family history of breast cancer. The cancer detection rate (CDR) per 1000 screening examinations, abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), sensitivity, and specificity were compared.ResultsA total of 863 women in the DBT cohort were matched with 1726 women in the DM cohort (median age, 53 years; interquartile range, 40-78 years) and 26 breast cancers (9 in the DBT cohort and 17 in the DM cohort) were identified. The DBT and DM cohorts showed comparable CDR (10.4 [9 of 863; 95% confidence interval {CI}: 4.8-19.7] vs. 9.8 [17 of 1726; 95% CI: 5.7-15.7] per 1000 examinations, respectively; P = 0.889). DBT cohort showed a higher AIR than the DM cohort (31.6% [273 of 863; 95% CI: 28.5%-34.9%] vs. 22.4% [387 of 1726; 95% CI: 20.5%-24.5%]; P < 0.001). The sensitivity for both cohorts was 100%. In women with negative findings on DBT or DM, supplemental US yielded similar CDRs in both DBT and DM cohorts (4.0 vs. 3.3 per 1000 examinations, respectively; P = 0.803) and higher AIR in the DBT cohort (24.8% [188 of 758; 95% CI: 21.8%-28.0%] vs. 16.9% [257 of 1516; 95% CI: 15.1%-18.9%; P < 0.001).ConclusionDBT screening combined with US showed comparable CDR but lower specificity than DM screening combined with US in women with dense breasts.
| S-EPMC10067692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:We aimed to estimate the incremental cancer detection rate achieved by adding three-dimensional functional infrared imaging (3DIRI) to digital mammography in women with dense breasts. MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this prospective study conducted between December 2014 and April 2016, 1727 women (median age 56) with percentage volumetric breast density > 6% were recruited at routine screening mammography to undergo additional 3DIRI. The 3DIRI findings were classified as negative or positive. Women with a negative mammography but positive 3DIRI were referred to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, whereas all other women underwent routine follow-up based on the mammography finding. Diagnosis of breast cancer was verified by histopathologic examination. The number of women diagnosed with a malignancy formed the basis of our statistical analysis. RESULTS:Mammography detected 7 cancers in 7 women. Of 1692 women with negative mammography, 222 women (13%) had a positive 3DIRI of which 219 underwent MRI. An additional 6 cancers were identified in 5 women, increasing the diagnostic yield from 7 of 1727 (0.41%) to 12 of 1727 (0.69%). The incremental cancer detection rate associated with using 3DIRI to select women for MRI was 5 of 222 (22.5 additional cancers per 1000). CONCLUSION:The use of 3DIRI to select women for an additional MRI can result in the detection of additional cancers in women with dense breasts, but at the expense of additional false positives and considerably lower positive predictive value of the combined examinations. Additional studies are necessary to evaluate the role of 3DIRI as an adjunct to mammography. KEY POINTS:• Use of three-dimensional functional infrared imaging to select women for an MRI in addition to screening mammography has the potential to improve breast cancer detection in women with dense breasts.
| S-EPMC6795638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aimed to systematically review and to meta-analyse the accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus digital mammography (DM) in women with mammographically dense breasts in screening and diagnosis. METHODS:Two independent reviewers identified screening or diagnostic studies reporting at least one of four outcomes (cancer detection rate-CDR, recall rate, sensitivity and specificity) for DBT and DM in women with mammographically dense breasts. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. Meta-analysis of CDR and recall rate used a random effects model. Summary ROC curve summarized sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS:Sixteen studies were included (five diagnostic; eleven screening). In diagnosis, DBT increased sensitivity (84%-90%) versus DM alone (69%-86%) but not specificity. DBT improved CDR versus DM alone (RR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.31). In screening, DBT?+?DM increased CDR versus DM alone (RR: 1.33, 95% CI 1.20-1.47 for retrospective studies; RR: 1.52, 95% CI 1.08-2.11 for prospective studies). Recall rate was significantly reduced by DBT?+?DM in retrospective studies (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.80) but not in two prospective studies (RR: 1.12, 95% CI 0.76-1.63). CONCLUSION:In women with mammographically dense breasts, DBT+/-DM increased CDR significantly (versus DM) in screening and diagnosis. In diagnosis, DBT+/-DM increased sensitivity but not specificity. The effect of DBT?+?DM on recall rate in screening dense breasts varied between studies.
| S-EPMC5883365 | biostudies-literature