Does access to prior mammograms improve the performance of radiographers in interpreting screening mammograms?

IF 2.5 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
J.D. Akwo , P.D. (Yun) Trieu , M.L. Barron , T. Reynolds , S.J. Lewis
{"title":"Does access to prior mammograms improve the performance of radiographers in interpreting screening mammograms?","authors":"J.D. Akwo ,&nbsp;P.D. (Yun) Trieu ,&nbsp;M.L. Barron ,&nbsp;T. Reynolds ,&nbsp;S.J. Lewis","doi":"10.1016/j.radi.2024.11.025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The impact of previous screening mammograms on radiographers' performance in mammography interpretation is unknown. This study assesses the impact that previous screening mammograms has on radiographers’ interpretation of mammograms.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Thirteen Australian radiographers working for the national breast screening service independently interpreted a mammography test-set containing mammograms of 28 women based on the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists’ classification. Twelve radiographers completed the “No prior test-set” (no previous mammograms available) while one radiographer completed the “Prior test-set” (most current screening mammograms with access to previous mammograms) in the first reading session. In the second reading session, 12 radiographers completed the “Prior test-set” and one radiographer completed the “No prior test-set”. Their performance with and without previous mammograms were calculated and compared.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The availability of prior mammograms significantly improved specificity [81(range:58–95) vs. 60(range:37–79); p = 0.002], ROC [91(range:80–99) vs. 82 (range:57–91); p = 0.003], and JAFROC 87(range:73–99) vs. 79 (range:52–91); p = 0.01]. Prior mammograms also significantly reduced false positives (p = 0.002). No differences were observed between readings with and without previous mammograms in terms of sensitivity (p = 0.70) and lesion sensitivity (p = 0.82). Years qualified as a radiographer did not modify the influence of previous mammograms on specificity, ROC, and false positives. Years specialised as breast radiographer slightly modified the influence of previous mammograms in radiographers with ≥25 years of experience but not those with &lt;25 years of experience as breast radiographers.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The availability of previous screening mammograms improves radiographers’ ability to discriminate between normal and abnormal mammograms and reduce the false positive rate without affecting the detection of breast cancer.</div></div><div><h3>Implications for practice</h3><div>The findings highlight the need for practices to store screening mammograms and for radiographers to actively refer to previous screening mammograms when interpreting mammograms from the current screening round. It also highlights the need for policies to establish a national accessible mammographic database platform for integrated clinics and to account for population mobility across states.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47416,"journal":{"name":"Radiography","volume":"31 1","pages":"Pages 247-253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817424003560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The impact of previous screening mammograms on radiographers' performance in mammography interpretation is unknown. This study assesses the impact that previous screening mammograms has on radiographers’ interpretation of mammograms.

Methods

Thirteen Australian radiographers working for the national breast screening service independently interpreted a mammography test-set containing mammograms of 28 women based on the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists’ classification. Twelve radiographers completed the “No prior test-set” (no previous mammograms available) while one radiographer completed the “Prior test-set” (most current screening mammograms with access to previous mammograms) in the first reading session. In the second reading session, 12 radiographers completed the “Prior test-set” and one radiographer completed the “No prior test-set”. Their performance with and without previous mammograms were calculated and compared.

Results

The availability of prior mammograms significantly improved specificity [81(range:58–95) vs. 60(range:37–79); p = 0.002], ROC [91(range:80–99) vs. 82 (range:57–91); p = 0.003], and JAFROC 87(range:73–99) vs. 79 (range:52–91); p = 0.01]. Prior mammograms also significantly reduced false positives (p = 0.002). No differences were observed between readings with and without previous mammograms in terms of sensitivity (p = 0.70) and lesion sensitivity (p = 0.82). Years qualified as a radiographer did not modify the influence of previous mammograms on specificity, ROC, and false positives. Years specialised as breast radiographer slightly modified the influence of previous mammograms in radiographers with ≥25 years of experience but not those with <25 years of experience as breast radiographers.

Conclusions

The availability of previous screening mammograms improves radiographers’ ability to discriminate between normal and abnormal mammograms and reduce the false positive rate without affecting the detection of breast cancer.

Implications for practice

The findings highlight the need for practices to store screening mammograms and for radiographers to actively refer to previous screening mammograms when interpreting mammograms from the current screening round. It also highlights the need for policies to establish a national accessible mammographic database platform for integrated clinics and to account for population mobility across states.
获得先前的乳房x光片是否提高了放射技师在解释筛查乳房x光片方面的表现?
简介:以前的筛查乳房x光片对放射技师在乳房x光片解释中的表现的影响尚不清楚。本研究评估了先前筛查乳房x光片对放射医师对乳房x光片的解释的影响。方法:为国家乳腺筛查服务工作的13名澳大利亚放射技师根据澳大利亚皇家和新西兰放射学家学院的分类,独立解读了包含28名妇女的乳房x光检查集。12名放射技师在第一次阅读中完成了“无先前测试集”(没有以前的乳房x光片可用),而1名放射技师完成了“先前测试集”(可以访问以前的乳房x光片的最新筛查乳房x光片)。在第二次阅读环节,12名放射技师完成“先前测试集”,1名放射技师完成“无先前测试集”。计算和比较他们在有和没有以前的乳房x光检查的表现。结果:既往乳房x光片的可用性显著提高了特异性[81(范围:58-95)vs. 60(范围:37-79);p = 0.002),中华民国(91(范围:80 - 99)和82(范围:57 - 91);p = 0.003], JAFROC为87(范围:73-99)vs. 79(范围:52-91);p = 0.01]。既往乳房x光检查也显著减少假阳性(p = 0.002)。在敏感性(p = 0.70)和病变敏感性(p = 0.82)方面,有和没有先前乳房x光检查的读数没有差异。获得放射技师资格的年数并没有改变以往乳房x光检查对特异性、ROC和假阳性的影响。在经验≥25年的放射技师中,以往乳房x线照片的影响略有改变,而经验≥25年的放射技师则没有。结论:以往筛查乳房x线照片的可用性提高了放射技师区分正常和异常乳房x线照片的能力,降低了假阳性率,但不影响乳腺癌的发现。对实践的启示:研究结果强调了实践中存储筛查性乳房x光片的必要性,以及放射科医师在解释当前筛查轮的乳房x光片时积极参考先前筛查性乳房x光片的必要性。它还强调需要制定政策,为综合诊所建立一个全国可访问的乳房x光检查数据库平台,并考虑到各州之间的人口流动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Radiography
Radiography RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
34.60%
发文量
169
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍: Radiography is an International, English language, peer-reviewed journal of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy. Radiography is the official professional journal of the College of Radiographers and is published quarterly. Radiography aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy and oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信