» Articles » PMID: 17906931

The Effect of Patient Navigation on Time to Diagnosis, Anxiety, and Satisfaction in Urban Minority Women with Abnormal Mammograms: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview
Journal J Urban Health
Publisher Springer
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2007 Oct 2
PMID 17906931
Citations 126
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Delay in follow-up after an abnormal mammogram is associated with advanced disease stage, poorer survival, and increased anxiety. Despite the implementation of many patient navigator programs across the country, there are few published, peer-reviewed studies documenting its effectiveness. We tested the effectiveness of a patient navigator in improving timeliness to diagnosis, decreasing anxiety, and increasing satisfaction in urban minority women after an abnormal mammogram. Women with suspicious mammograms were randomly assigned to usual care (N=50) or usual care plus intervention with a patient navigator (N=55). There were no demographic differences between the two groups. Women in the intervention group had shorter times to diagnostic resolution (mean 25.0 vs. 42.7 days; p=.001), with 22% of women in the control group without a final diagnosis at 60 days vs. 6% in the intervention group. The intervention group also had lower mean anxiety scores (decrease of 8.0 in intervention vs. increase of 5.8 in control; p<.001), and higher mean satisfaction scores (4.3 vs. 2.9; p<.001). Patient navigation is an effective strategy to improve timely diagnostic resolution, significantly decrease anxiety, and increase patient satisfaction among urban minority women with abnormal mammograms.

Citing Articles

Negative spillover due to constraints on care delivery: a potential source of bias in pragmatic clinical trials.

Mann S Trials. 2024; 25(1):833.

PMID: 39696676 PMC: 11653840. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08675-9.


A Cancer Patient Navigation Training Program for Limited-Resource Settings: Results from 5 Years of Training.

Badal K, Monroe N, Mohamed A, Maniam A, Badal M, Maharaj K J Cancer Educ. 2024; 40(1):102-109.

PMID: 39316342 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-024-02511-z.


Predicting the Future by Studying the Past for Patients With Cancer Diagnosed in the Emergency Department.

Ray E, Lafata J, Reeder-Hayes K, Thompson C J Clin Oncol. 2024; 42(21):2491-2494.

PMID: 38748942 PMC: 11254559. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.24.00480.


Screening mammographic performance by race and age in the National Mammography Database: 29,479,665 screening mammograms from 13,181,241 women.

Lee C, Goldman L, Grimm L, Liu I, Simanowith M, Rosenberg R Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023; 203(3):599-612.

PMID: 37897646 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-07124-6.


Restructuring lung cancer care to accelerate diagnosis and treatment in patients vulnerable to healthcare disparities using an innovative care model.

Copeland J, Neal E, Phillips W, Hofferberth S, Lathan C, Donington J MethodsX. 2023; 11:102338.

PMID: 37701734 PMC: 10494257. DOI: 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102338.


References
1.
Kothari A, Fentiman I . 22. Diagnostic delays in breast cancer and impact on survival. Int J Clin Pract. 2003; 57(3):200-3. View

2.
Frelix G, Rosenblatt R, Solomon M, Vikram B . Breast cancer screening in underserved women in the Bronx. J Natl Med Assoc. 1999; 91(4):195-200. PMC: 2608420. View

3.
Heckman B, Fisher E, Monsees B, Merbaum M, Ristvedt S, Bishop C . Coping and anxiety in women recalled for additional diagnostic procedures following an abnormal screening mammogram. Health Psychol. 2004; 23(1):42-8. DOI: 10.1037/0278-6133.23.1.42. View

4.
Ell K, Padgett D, Vourlekis B, Nissly J, Pineda D, Sarabia O . Abnormal mammogram follow-up: a pilot study women with low income. Cancer Pract. 2002; 10(3):130-8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-5394.2002.103009.x. View

5.
ZUNG W . A rating instrument for anxiety disorders. Psychosomatics. 1971; 12(6):371-9. DOI: 10.1016/S0033-3182(71)71479-0. View