Lars Grimm

Objective: Assess the impact of COVID-19 on patient-breast radiologist interactions and evaluate the relationship between safety measure-constrained communication and physician wellbeing. Methods: A 41-question survey on the perceived effect of COVID-19 on patient care was distributed from June 2020 to September 2020 to members of the Society of Breast Imaging and the National Consortium of Breast Centers. Non-radiologists and international members were excluded. Anxiety and psychological distress scores were calculated. A multivariable logistic model was used to identify demographic and mental health factors associated with responses. Results: Five hundred twenty-five surveys met inclusion criteria (23% response rate). Diminished ability to fulfill patients' emotional needs was reported by 46% (221/479), a response associated with younger age (OR, 0.8 per decade; P<0.01), higher anxiety (OR, 2.3; P<0.01), and higher psychological distress (OR, 2.2; P=0.04). Personal protective equipment made patient communication more difficult for 88% (422/478), a response associated with younger age (OR, 0.8 per decade; P=0.008), female gender (OR, 1.9; P<0.01), and greater anxiety (OR, 2.6; P=0.001). The inability to provide the same level of care as prior to COVID-19 was reported by 37% (177/481) and was associated with greater anxiety (OR, 3.4; P<0.001) and psychological distress (OR, 1.7; P=0.03). Conclusion: The majority of breast radiologists reported that COVID-19 has had a negative impact on patient care. This perception was more likely among younger radiologists and those with higher levels of anxiety and psychological distress.

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Objective</jats:title> <jats:p>To define and illustrate three new descriptors for microcalcification morphology on mammography, and provide a preliminary assessment of their potential clinical value.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>The institutional review board approved this retrospective study and waived the requirement for informed consent. One thousand consecutive biopsy-proven cases of microcalcifications were retrospectively reviewed by the index study observer, a fellowship-trained breast radiologist blinded to histologic outcome. Each case was evaluated for traditional Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) morphology descriptors, as well as for the presence of one of three proposed new calcification morphology descriptors: (1) square, (2) sandwich, and (3) teardrop, pill &amp; capsule. Positive predictive value (PPV) for each proposed shape was calculated. Interobserver variability was calculated on a subset of 200 cases, which were evaluated by two additional breast radiologists blinded to the interpretation of the index observer.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Of 1000 cases, 702 (70.2%) were benign, and 298 (29.8%) were malignant. There were 51 (5.1%) square and 60 (6.0%) sandwich calcification cases, which were all benign at biopsy (PPV, 0%). Of the 106 (10.6%) cases that included teardrop, pill &amp; capsule calcifications, 90 were malignant (PPV, 84.9%). Interobserver variability for the traditional BI-RADS morphology descriptors (κ = 0.40) was comparable to observer variability of the proposed new morphologies: square (κ = 0.39), sandwich (κ = 0.47), and teardrop, pill &amp; capsule (κ = 0.49).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>The proposed calcification descriptors square and sandwich-shaped had a PPV of 0%, and they may represent new typically benign morphologies. In contrast, teardrop, pill &amp; capsule–shaped calcifications indicate a higher likelihood of malignancy than that of previously established descriptors.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Writing a scientific manuscript can be a very intimidating process for new writers. However, writing a scientific research article can be broken down into discrete steps to make the process more digestible. Radiology manuscripts have common conventions that differ from research in technical and other medical fields. The practical steps summarized within describe what to do before you start writing, successful writing strategies, and common writing styles. Templates for producing an abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion are outlined, along with tips to collect references and produce high quality figures. All writers can benefit from an outside writing perspective, and the practical steps described should ease the transition from a blank page to a finished manuscript.</jats:p>