Evaluating Efficiency of Time Use and Operational Costs in a Breast Clinic Workflow: A Comparative Analysis Between Automated Breast Ultrasound and Handheld Ultrasound.


Creative Commons License

Güldoğan N., Ulus S., Kovan Ö., Aksan A., Tokmakçıoğlu K., Camgöz Akdağ H., ...Daha Fazla

European journal of breast health, cilt.19, sa.4, ss.311-317, 2023 (ESCI) identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 19 Sayı: 4
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.4274/ejbh.galenos.2023.2023-8-4
  • Dergi Adı: European journal of breast health
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.311-317
  • Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficiency of time use for radiologists and operational costs of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) versus

handheld breast ultrasound (HHUS).

Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, and informed consent was waived. One hundred and fifty-three

patients, aged 21–81 years, underwent both ABUS and HHUS. The time required for the ABUS scanning and radiologist interpretation and the combined

scanning and interpretation time for HHUS were recorded for screening and diagnostic exams. One-Way ANOVA test was used to compare the methods,

and Cohen Kappa statistics were used to achieve the agreement levels. Finally, the cost of the methods and return of interest were compared by completing

a cost analysis.

Results: The overall mean Å} standard deviation examination time required for ABUS examination was 676.2Å}145.42 seconds while mean scan time

performed by radiographers was 411.76Å}67.79 seconds, and the mean radiologist time was 234.01Å}81.88 seconds. The overall mean examination time

required for HHUS was 452.52Å}171.26 seconds, and the mean scan time and radiologist time were 419.62Å}143.24 seconds. The reduced time translated

into savings of 7.369 TL/month, and savings of 22% in operational costs was achieved with ABUS.

Conclusion: The radiologist’s time was reduced with ABUS in both screening and diagnostic scenarios. Although a second-look HHUS is required for

diagnostic cases, ABUS still saves radiologists time by enabling a focused approach instead of a complete evaluation of both breasts. Thus, ABUS appears to

save both medical staff time and operational costs.