Patient expectations and costs of immediate reporting of screening mammography: Talk isn't cheap

OBJECTIVE. Our purpose was to determine whether patients prefer immediate o r delayed results of screening mammography and to determine the cost of imm ediate reporting at our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A survey was anonymously and randomly distributed to 129 women who were 35-70 years old during a visit to their primary care ph ysician, asking the women's preference for receiving mammography results by one of two systems: by letter with a return visit for any additional tests ; or by speaking at once with the radiologist, with the option of additiona l tests being performed during the same visit. Patients' willingness to pay for the latter service was also determined. A cost identification model wa s constructed using commercially available software. We considered the impa ct on radiologists' and technologists' time and the need for additional equ ipment and space, and we analyzed the effect on the cost of immediate repor ting. RESULTS. One hundred twenty (93%) surveys were completed. Eighty women (67% ) preferred immediate reporting, and 62 (78%) of these 80 patients would wa it 30-60 min. The additional cost of immediate reporting is $28.22 per pati ent. Only 11% of patients were willing to pay this additional cost. When ne w-equipment and space were not required, the cost would increase by $4.38. This cost was most influenced by the time required to give patients normal results. CONCLUSION. Most surveyed patients preferred speaking with a radiologist im mediately but were unwilling to pay additional fees. Radiologists, hospital administrators, and health care planners must be aware of the costs of imm ediate reporting and must factor these costs into any change in hospital or national policy.