Keywords:
Performed at one institution, Observational, Prospective, Quality assurance, Education and training, Cancer, Vacuum assisted biopsy, Diagnostic procedure, Biopsy, Ultrasound, Percutaneous, Mammography, Professional issues, Management, Breast
Authors:
V. A. VITALE1, F. Meani1, M. MANGANIELLO2, C. M. L. Catanese1, F. DEL GRANDE1, S. Rizzo1; 1Lugano/CH, 2Mendrisio-Ticino/CH
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2020/C-00973
Conclusion
All patients were aware that a radiologist would perform the upcoming invasive procedure.
The radiologist was the medical professional chosen to give the biopsy result from 1/3 to half patients, even not acknowledged to have the confidence of a family doctor or a gynecologist. Patients still prefer to meet the doctor in person, even if they would receive the result as soon as possible.
The non-technical skill of adequate communication should be encouraged to be developed in the curriculum of any breast imaging professional.
This study has some limitations. First, a limited number of patients in a single site were involved. Second, this survey did not considered male patients preferences, due to to the lack of male patients in the observational period.
Despite such limitations, this study demonstrates a major role of breast imagers to be considered “the face and the heart” of radiology departments.