TY - JOUR
T1 - Adaptations of Breast Imaging Centers to the COVID-19 Pandemic
T2 - A Survey of California and Texas
AU - Chalfant, James S.
AU - Cohen, Ethan O.
AU - Leung, Jessica W.T.
AU - Pittman, Sarah M.
AU - Kothari, Pranay D.
AU - Downey, John R.
AU - Sohlich, Rita E.
AU - Chong, Alice
AU - Grimm, Lars J.
AU - Hoyt, Anne C.
AU - Ojeda-Fournier, Haydee
AU - Joe, Bonnie N.
AU - Trinh, Long
AU - Rosen, Eric L.
AU - Feig, Stephen A.
AU - Aminololama-Shakeri, Shadi
AU - Ikeda, Debra M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Society of Breast Imaging 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
PY - 2021/5/1
Y1 - 2021/5/1
N2 - Objective: To determine the early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast imaging centers in California and Texas and compare regional differences. Methods: An 11-item survey was emailed to American College of Radiology accredited breast imaging facilities in California and Texas in August 2020. A question subset addressed March-April government restrictions on elective services ("during the shutdown"and "after reopening"). Comparisons were made between states with chi-square and Fisher's tests, and timeframes with McNemar's and paired t-Tests. Results: There were 54 respondents (54/240, 23%, 26 California, 28 Texas). Imaging volumes fell during the shutdown and remained below pre-pandemic levels after reopening, with reduction in screening greatest (ultrasound 12% of baseline, mammography 13%, MRI 23%), followed by diagnostic MRI (43%), procedures (44%), and diagnostics (45%). California reported higher volumes during the shutdown (procedures, MRI) and after reopening (diagnostics, procedures, MRI) versus Texas (P=0.001-0.02). Most screened patients (52/54, 96% symptoms and 42/54, 78% temperatures), and 100% (53/53) modified check-in and check-out. Reading rooms or physician work were altered for social distancing (31/54, 57%). Physician mask (45/48, 94%), gown (15/48, 31%), eyewear (22/48, 46%), and face shield (22/48, 46%) use during procedures increased after reopening versus pre-pandemic (P<0.001-0.03). Physician (47/54, 87%) and staff (45/53, 85%) financial impacts were common, but none reported terminations. Conclusion: Breast imaging volumes during the early pandemic fell more severely in Texas than in California. Safety measures and financial impacts on physicians and staff were similar in both states.
AB - Objective: To determine the early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast imaging centers in California and Texas and compare regional differences. Methods: An 11-item survey was emailed to American College of Radiology accredited breast imaging facilities in California and Texas in August 2020. A question subset addressed March-April government restrictions on elective services ("during the shutdown"and "after reopening"). Comparisons were made between states with chi-square and Fisher's tests, and timeframes with McNemar's and paired t-Tests. Results: There were 54 respondents (54/240, 23%, 26 California, 28 Texas). Imaging volumes fell during the shutdown and remained below pre-pandemic levels after reopening, with reduction in screening greatest (ultrasound 12% of baseline, mammography 13%, MRI 23%), followed by diagnostic MRI (43%), procedures (44%), and diagnostics (45%). California reported higher volumes during the shutdown (procedures, MRI) and after reopening (diagnostics, procedures, MRI) versus Texas (P=0.001-0.02). Most screened patients (52/54, 96% symptoms and 42/54, 78% temperatures), and 100% (53/53) modified check-in and check-out. Reading rooms or physician work were altered for social distancing (31/54, 57%). Physician mask (45/48, 94%), gown (15/48, 31%), eyewear (22/48, 46%), and face shield (22/48, 46%) use during procedures increased after reopening versus pre-pandemic (P<0.001-0.03). Physician (47/54, 87%) and staff (45/53, 85%) financial impacts were common, but none reported terminations. Conclusion: Breast imaging volumes during the early pandemic fell more severely in Texas than in California. Safety measures and financial impacts on physicians and staff were similar in both states.
KW - COVID-19
KW - breast imaging
KW - financial impact
KW - safety measures
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85107630136&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85107630136&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/jbi/wbab020
DO - 10.1093/jbi/wbab020
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85107630136
SN - 2631-6110
VL - 3
SP - 343
EP - 353
JO - Journal of Breast Imaging
JF - Journal of Breast Imaging
IS - 3
ER -