Scholarlink

Objectives <p>To evaluate patient acceptance and feedback regarding supplemental imaging modalities: automated whole-breast ultrasound (ABUS), contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), and abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) within the BRAID (Breast Screening: Risk Adaptive Imaging for Density) trial.</p> Materials and methods <p>An adapted Testing Morbidities Index questionnaire was utilised to capture participant experiences and perceptions (January-April 2024) related to AB-MRI, ABUS and CEM. Likert-scale questions assessed discomfort, anxiety, and overall satisfaction for each imaging modality, while thematic analysis was applied to free-text patient feedback. Additionally, reasons for withdrawal were recorded for each modality.</p> Results <p>Among 159 women providing feedback, 57/159 (35.8%) underwent ABUS, 52/159 (32.7%) CEM, and 50/159 (31.5%) AB-MRI. Acceptability of ABUS, CEM and AB-MRI was rated similarly to mammography by 71/159 (64.8%) of these respondents, with 72/159 (45.3%) considering them superior. Mild-to-moderate discomfort due to breast compression was reported for ABUS and CEM, whereas AB-MRI resulted in the least discomfort. Pre-procedural anxiety was observed across all imaging modalities, particularly with contrast-enhanced techniques; however, experiences were generally well-tolerated. Effective communication and pre-test information reduced anxiety levels, with most participants willing to repeat the procedures. 151/984 (15.3%) withdrawals in BRAID were due to adverse patient experiences, with contrast-enhanced techniques accounting for most of these withdrawals (CEM: 69/151, 45.7%; AB-MRI: 66/151, 43.7%; ABUS: 12/151, 7.9%). The main reasons for withdrawal were unhappiness with the allocated imaging arm and discomfort or anxiety during the procedure.</p> Conclusion <p>Supplemental imaging modalities are generally well-accepted by patients with benefit throughout gained by clear communication and preparedness.</p> Critical relevance statement <p>Feedback from a subgroup of women participating in the BRAID trial shows that supplemental imaging alongside routine screening is well-accepted. Clear communication and empathetic care further improve acceptance, supporting a shift toward personalised breast cancer screening for women with dense breasts.</p> Key Points <p><UnorderedList Mark="Bullet"> <ItemContent> <p>Understanding women’s imaging experiences is essential for optimising breast screening practices.</p> </ItemContent> <ItemContent> <p>Acceptability of supplemental imaging was rated similar to or better than mammography by most participants.</p> </ItemContent> <ItemContent> <p>Clear, empathetic communication reduced anxiety and improved experience with contrast-enhanced imaging.</p> </ItemContent> </UnorderedList></p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Acceptance, experience, and feedback for supplemental screening in dense breasts among women participating in the BRAID trial

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月16日

查看全文
  • Iris Allajbeu,
  • Kate R. Charnley,
  • Yuyin Yang,
  • Johanna Field-Rayner,
  • Kirsten Morris,
  • Nicholas R. Payne,
  • Fleur Kilburn-Toppin,
  • Roido Manavaki,
  • Fiona J. Gilbert

摘要

Objectives

To evaluate patient acceptance and feedback regarding supplemental imaging modalities: automated whole-breast ultrasound (ABUS), contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), and abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) within the BRAID (Breast Screening: Risk Adaptive Imaging for Density) trial.

Materials and methods

An adapted Testing Morbidities Index questionnaire was utilised to capture participant experiences and perceptions (January-April 2024) related to AB-MRI, ABUS and CEM. Likert-scale questions assessed discomfort, anxiety, and overall satisfaction for each imaging modality, while thematic analysis was applied to free-text patient feedback. Additionally, reasons for withdrawal were recorded for each modality.

Results

Among 159 women providing feedback, 57/159 (35.8%) underwent ABUS, 52/159 (32.7%) CEM, and 50/159 (31.5%) AB-MRI. Acceptability of ABUS, CEM and AB-MRI was rated similarly to mammography by 71/159 (64.8%) of these respondents, with 72/159 (45.3%) considering them superior. Mild-to-moderate discomfort due to breast compression was reported for ABUS and CEM, whereas AB-MRI resulted in the least discomfort. Pre-procedural anxiety was observed across all imaging modalities, particularly with contrast-enhanced techniques; however, experiences were generally well-tolerated. Effective communication and pre-test information reduced anxiety levels, with most participants willing to repeat the procedures. 151/984 (15.3%) withdrawals in BRAID were due to adverse patient experiences, with contrast-enhanced techniques accounting for most of these withdrawals (CEM: 69/151, 45.7%; AB-MRI: 66/151, 43.7%; ABUS: 12/151, 7.9%). The main reasons for withdrawal were unhappiness with the allocated imaging arm and discomfort or anxiety during the procedure.

Conclusion

Supplemental imaging modalities are generally well-accepted by patients with benefit throughout gained by clear communication and preparedness.

Critical relevance statement

Feedback from a subgroup of women participating in the BRAID trial shows that supplemental imaging alongside routine screening is well-accepted. Clear communication and empathetic care further improve acceptance, supporting a shift toward personalised breast cancer screening for women with dense breasts.

Key Points

Understanding women’s imaging experiences is essential for optimising breast screening practices.

Acceptability of supplemental imaging was rated similar to or better than mammography by most participants.

Clear, empathetic communication reduced anxiety and improved experience with contrast-enhanced imaging.

Graphical Abstract