Original Investigation| Volume 28, ISSUE 4, P487-494, April 2021

Screening Mammogram Results in the Digital Age: Video Messaging - A Pilot Study

Published:March 06, 2020DOI:


      To assess patients’ preferences for receiving screening mammogram results via a video message from their radiologist versus the traditional methods.


      The Institutional Review Board approved this prospective study which enrolled participants from March to May 2019, after written consent was obtained. Two breast radiologists prerecorded video results for normal and abnormal screening mammograms. Women 40 years and older presenting for a screening mammogram who had a prior mammogram and no clinical symptoms were invited to participate in the study. After their mammogram, participants were assigned to obtain results via video message or by traditional methods such as a mailed letter or phone call. Participants then completed an online survey asking questions regarding the method of results delivery.


      Around 80/94 participants ranging in age from 40 to 76 years old responded (85% response rate), of which 73% (58/80) preferred a video message from the radiologist for their mammogram results (p = 0.029). When analyzed by age, the video results were most liked by patients 40-60 years old. When analyzed by education level, participants with a Master's or Bachelor's degree liked receiving their results by video.


      Our study suggests that patients in the screening mammography setting may prefer a video message from their radiologist to the traditional methods of delivery, including mailed letters and receiving results from their primary care provider. Video results could potentially be utilized in the delivery of other results of standardized medical tests as a method to offer more timely delivery of results and a personal connection.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Academic Radiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Smith-Bindman R.
        • Miglioretti D.L.
        • Johnson E.
        • et al.
        Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems, 1996-2010.
        JAMA. 2012; 307: 2400-2409
        • Glazer G.M.
        • Ruiz-Wibbelsmann J.A.
        The invisible radiologist.
        Radiology. 2011; 258: 18-22
        • Gunn A.J.
        • Mangano M.D.
        • Choy G.
        • et al.
        Rethinking the role of the radiologist: enhancing visibility through both traditional and nontraditional reporting practices.
        Radiographics. 2015; 35: 416-423
        • Kemp J.L.
        • Mahoney M.C.
        • Mathews V.P.
        • et al.
        Patient-centered radiology: where are we, where do we want to be, and how do we get there?.
        Radiology. 2017; 285: 601-608
        • Basu P.A.
        • Ruiz-Wibbelsmann J.A.
        • Spielman S.B.
        • et al.
        Creating a patient-centered imaging service: determining what patients want.
        AJR. 2011; 196: 605-610
        • Pahade J.
        • Couto C.
        • Davis R.B.
        • et al.
        Reviewing imaging examination results with a radiologist immediately after study completion: patient preferences and assessment of feasibility in an academic department.
        AJR. 2012; 199: 844-851
        • Kuhlman M.
        • Meyer M.
        • Krupinski E.A.
        Direct reporting of results to patients: the future of radiology?.
        Acad Radiol. 2012; 19: 646-650
        • Singh H.
        • Thomas E.J.
        • Mani S.
        • et al.
        Timely follow-up of abnormal diagnostic imaging test results in an outpatient setting: are electronic medical records achieving their potential?.
        Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169: 1578-1586
        • Koney N.
        • Roudenko A.
        • Ro M.
        • et al.
        Patients want to meet with the imaging experts.
        JACR. 2016; 13: 465-470
        • Shakeri A.
        • Soo M.S.
        • Grimm L.J.
        Radiologist-patient communication: current practices and barriers to communication in breast imaging.
        JACR. 2019; 16: 709-716
        • Carney P.A.
        • Kettler M.
        • Cook A.J.
        • et al.
        An assessment of the likelihood, frequency, and content of verbal communication between radiologists and women receiving screening and diagnostic mammography.
        Acad Radiol. 2009; 16: 1056-1063
        • Hendrick R.E.
        • Cutter G.R.
        • Berns E.A.
        • et al.
        Community-based mammography practice: services, charges, and interpretation methods.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184: 433-438
      1. Mammography Quality Standards Act. Available at Accessed on April 1, 2018.

        • Sickles E.A.
        • D'Orsi C.J.
        • Bassett L.W.
        • et al.
        ACR BI-RADS® Mammography.
        in: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, Reston, VA American College of Radiology, 2013
        • Harris P.A.
        • Taylor R.
        • Thielke R.
        • et al.
        Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.
        J Biomed Inform. 2009; 42: 377-381
        • Shah B.A.
        • Staschen J.
        • Pham N.
        • et al.
        Communicating mammography results: by what method and how quickly do women want their screening mammogram results?.
        JACR. 2019; 16: 928-935
        • Fang J.
        • Boos J.
        • Cohen M.P.
        • et al.
        Radiologists’ experience with patient interactions in the era of open access of patients to radiology reports.
        JACR. 2018; 15: 1573-1579
        • Nuygen D.L.
        • Ambinder E.B.
        • Jones M.K.
        • et al.
        Improving patient comprehension of screening mammography recall lay letters.
        JACR. 2019; (Ahead of print, Online only)