Rebecca Milman, Nicholas B. Bevins, Mosa Alhamami, Nathan Busse, Andreea Dohatcu, Katie W. Hulme, Mary Ellen Jafari, Steven M. LaFontaine, Richard D. Nawfel, Jeffrey S. Nelson, Megan K. Russ, Michael Silosky, John M. Wait
{"title":"AAPM医学物理实践指南MPPG 17。a:乳房x光检查工作站显示器的质量管理。","authors":"Rebecca Milman, Nicholas B. Bevins, Mosa Alhamami, Nathan Busse, Andreea Dohatcu, Katie W. Hulme, Mary Ellen Jafari, Steven M. LaFontaine, Richard D. Nawfel, Jeffrey S. Nelson, Megan K. Russ, Michael Silosky, John M. Wait","doi":"10.1002/acm2.14625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) sets quality standards for displays used to interpret mammography images. With the shift to digital mammography and the widespread use of remote reading workstations (RWS), updated quality management (QM) programs are needed to ensure consistent image presentation and accurate interpretation. This document recommends a QM framework for mammography RWS displays, addressing challenges such as remote environments, regulatory compliance, and evolving technology. The QM model highlights the central role of medical physicists in program design, oversight, and data review. It emphasizes periodic quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) procedures and training for interpreting physicians and staff. A structure for QM for remote RWS, including guidance on environmental conditions, hands-on testing, and remote monitoring solutions, is included. The proposed program balances scientific rigor, cost-effectiveness, and practical implementation, maintaining image quality and safety. By providing a structured approach to RWS display management, this framework supports regulators, accreditation bodies, and healthcare facilities in adapting to advancements in mammography technology while addressing logistical and operational challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"26 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.14625","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline MPPG 17.a: Quality management for mammography review workstation displays\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca Milman, Nicholas B. Bevins, Mosa Alhamami, Nathan Busse, Andreea Dohatcu, Katie W. Hulme, Mary Ellen Jafari, Steven M. LaFontaine, Richard D. Nawfel, Jeffrey S. Nelson, Megan K. Russ, Michael Silosky, John M. Wait\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acm2.14625\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) sets quality standards for displays used to interpret mammography images. With the shift to digital mammography and the widespread use of remote reading workstations (RWS), updated quality management (QM) programs are needed to ensure consistent image presentation and accurate interpretation. This document recommends a QM framework for mammography RWS displays, addressing challenges such as remote environments, regulatory compliance, and evolving technology. The QM model highlights the central role of medical physicists in program design, oversight, and data review. It emphasizes periodic quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) procedures and training for interpreting physicians and staff. A structure for QM for remote RWS, including guidance on environmental conditions, hands-on testing, and remote monitoring solutions, is included. The proposed program balances scientific rigor, cost-effectiveness, and practical implementation, maintaining image quality and safety. By providing a structured approach to RWS display management, this framework supports regulators, accreditation bodies, and healthcare facilities in adapting to advancements in mammography technology while addressing logistical and operational challenges.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"26 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.14625\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.14625\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.14625","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline MPPG 17.a: Quality management for mammography review workstation displays
The Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) sets quality standards for displays used to interpret mammography images. With the shift to digital mammography and the widespread use of remote reading workstations (RWS), updated quality management (QM) programs are needed to ensure consistent image presentation and accurate interpretation. This document recommends a QM framework for mammography RWS displays, addressing challenges such as remote environments, regulatory compliance, and evolving technology. The QM model highlights the central role of medical physicists in program design, oversight, and data review. It emphasizes periodic quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) procedures and training for interpreting physicians and staff. A structure for QM for remote RWS, including guidance on environmental conditions, hands-on testing, and remote monitoring solutions, is included. The proposed program balances scientific rigor, cost-effectiveness, and practical implementation, maintaining image quality and safety. By providing a structured approach to RWS display management, this framework supports regulators, accreditation bodies, and healthcare facilities in adapting to advancements in mammography technology while addressing logistical and operational challenges.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission.
JACMP will publish:
-Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500.
-Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed.
-Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references.
-Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents.
-Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews.
-Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics.
-Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic