Further investigations during follow up of breast cancer patients treated with curative intent
Association of Breast Surgery ePoster Library. Katherine Kabeer K. 05/13/19; 257183; P141
Kirti Katherine Kabeer
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Discussion Forum (0)
Rate & Comment (0)
P141
Topic: Other
Background: Gold standard for follow up care in primarily treated breast cancer patients includes clinical examination and mammographic surveillance. However, some patients undergo additional investigations during their follow up period based on new symptoms and clinic findings. These interventions have an impact on patient experience, resources and costs and in some cases, unnecessary radiation exposure to the patient. We audited a sample of our patients to assess the extent of these investigations in our breast unit. Methods: A retrospective audit of 150 follow up patients treated for breast cancer with curative intent in 2015 was done and data including patient demographics, treatment and follow up investigations were obtained from the Somerset database and electronic patient records. Results: Out of 150 patients, 34 (23%) patients had additional imaging investigations with 14 (42%) having ultrasound scans, 14 (42%) having extended CT scans,8 (24%) having MRI scans and 4 (12%) having bone scans. A majority of investigations was ordered for symptom of pain. In the whole group, only one bone metastasis was detected, while 6% had benign findings. Out of these investigations 38% was requested by the oncologist, 11% by breast surgeons and 26% by other specialities. Conclusion:Additional investigations during follow up have poor yields and cost and resource implications. A further audit with larger patient group and cost analysis is required to influence standard practice.
Topic: Other
Background: Gold standard for follow up care in primarily treated breast cancer patients includes clinical examination and mammographic surveillance. However, some patients undergo additional investigations during their follow up period based on new symptoms and clinic findings. These interventions have an impact on patient experience, resources and costs and in some cases, unnecessary radiation exposure to the patient. We audited a sample of our patients to assess the extent of these investigations in our breast unit. Methods: A retrospective audit of 150 follow up patients treated for breast cancer with curative intent in 2015 was done and data including patient demographics, treatment and follow up investigations were obtained from the Somerset database and electronic patient records. Results: Out of 150 patients, 34 (23%) patients had additional imaging investigations with 14 (42%) having ultrasound scans, 14 (42%) having extended CT scans,8 (24%) having MRI scans and 4 (12%) having bone scans. A majority of investigations was ordered for symptom of pain. In the whole group, only one bone metastasis was detected, while 6% had benign findings. Out of these investigations 38% was requested by the oncologist, 11% by breast surgeons and 26% by other specialities. Conclusion:Additional investigations during follow up have poor yields and cost and resource implications. A further audit with larger patient group and cost analysis is required to influence standard practice.
P141
Topic: Other
Background: Gold standard for follow up care in primarily treated breast cancer patients includes clinical examination and mammographic surveillance. However, some patients undergo additional investigations during their follow up period based on new symptoms and clinic findings. These interventions have an impact on patient experience, resources and costs and in some cases, unnecessary radiation exposure to the patient. We audited a sample of our patients to assess the extent of these investigations in our breast unit. Methods: A retrospective audit of 150 follow up patients treated for breast cancer with curative intent in 2015 was done and data including patient demographics, treatment and follow up investigations were obtained from the Somerset database and electronic patient records. Results: Out of 150 patients, 34 (23%) patients had additional imaging investigations with 14 (42%) having ultrasound scans, 14 (42%) having extended CT scans,8 (24%) having MRI scans and 4 (12%) having bone scans. A majority of investigations was ordered for symptom of pain. In the whole group, only one bone metastasis was detected, while 6% had benign findings. Out of these investigations 38% was requested by the oncologist, 11% by breast surgeons and 26% by other specialities. Conclusion:Additional investigations during follow up have poor yields and cost and resource implications. A further audit with larger patient group and cost analysis is required to influence standard practice.
Topic: Other
Background: Gold standard for follow up care in primarily treated breast cancer patients includes clinical examination and mammographic surveillance. However, some patients undergo additional investigations during their follow up period based on new symptoms and clinic findings. These interventions have an impact on patient experience, resources and costs and in some cases, unnecessary radiation exposure to the patient. We audited a sample of our patients to assess the extent of these investigations in our breast unit. Methods: A retrospective audit of 150 follow up patients treated for breast cancer with curative intent in 2015 was done and data including patient demographics, treatment and follow up investigations were obtained from the Somerset database and electronic patient records. Results: Out of 150 patients, 34 (23%) patients had additional imaging investigations with 14 (42%) having ultrasound scans, 14 (42%) having extended CT scans,8 (24%) having MRI scans and 4 (12%) having bone scans. A majority of investigations was ordered for symptom of pain. In the whole group, only one bone metastasis was detected, while 6% had benign findings. Out of these investigations 38% was requested by the oncologist, 11% by breast surgeons and 26% by other specialities. Conclusion:Additional investigations during follow up have poor yields and cost and resource implications. A further audit with larger patient group and cost analysis is required to influence standard practice.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}