Performance benchmarks for screening mammography

被引:267
作者
Rosenberg, Robert D.
Yankaskas, Bonnie C.
Abraham, Linn A.
Sickles, Edward A.
Lehman, Constance D.
Geller, Berta M.
Carney, Patricia A.
Kerlikowske, Karla
Buist, Diana S. M.
Weaver, Donald L.
Barlow, William E.
Ballard-Barbash, Rachel
机构
[1] 1 Univ New Mexico, Dept Radiol, Hlth Sci Ctr, Albuquerque, NM 87131 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Dept Radiol, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[3] Grp Hlth Ctr Hlth Studies, Seattle, WA USA
[4] Canc Res & Biostat, Seattle, WA USA
[5] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Radiol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[6] Univ Washington, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[7] Univ Vermont, Off Hlth Promot Res, Dept Pathol, Burlington, VT USA
[8] Univ Vermont, Vermont Canc Ctr, Burlington, VT USA
[9] Dartmouth Coll Sch Med, Dept Community & Family Med, Hanover, NH USA
[10] Univ Calif San Francisco, Gen Internal Med Sect, Dept Vet Affairs, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[11] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[12] NCI, Appl Res Program, Div Canc Control & Populat Sci, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2411051504
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the range of performance outcomes of the radiologist in an audit of screening mammography by using a representative sample of U. S. radiologists to allow development of performance benchmarks for screening mammography. Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained, and study was HIPAA compliant. Informed consent was or was not obtained according to institutional review board guidelines. Data from 188 mammographic facilities and 807 radiologists obtained between 1996 and 2002 were analyzed from six registries from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). Contributed data included demographic information, clinical findings, mammographic interpretation, and biopsy results. Measurements calculated were positive predictive values (PPVs) from screening mammography (PPV1), biopsy recommendation (PPV2), biopsy performed (PPV3), recall rate, cancer detection rate, mean cancer size, and cancer stage. Radiologist performance data are presented as 50th ( median), 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles and as graphic presentations by using smoothed curves. Results: There were 2 580 151 screening mammographic studies from 1 117 390 women (age range, < 30 to >= 80 years). The respective means and ranges of performance outcomes for the middle 50% of radiologists were as follows: recall rate, 9.8% and 6.4% - 13.3%; PPV1, 4.8% and 3.4% - 6.2%; and PPV2, 24.6% and 18.8% - 32.0%. Mean cancer detection rate was 4.7 per 1000, and the mean size of invasive cancers was 13 mm. The range of performance outcomes for the middle 80% of radiologists also was presented. Conclusion: Community screening mammographic performance measurements of cancer outcomes for the majority of radiologists in the BCSC surpass performance recommendations. Recall rate for almost half of radiologists, however, is higher than the recommended rate.
引用
收藏
页码:55 / 66
页数:12
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]   Rate of breast cancer diagnoses among postmenopausal women with self-reported breast symptoms [J].
Aiello, EJ ;
Buist, DSM ;
White, E ;
Seger, D ;
Taplin, SH .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN BOARD OF FAMILY PRACTICE, 2004, 17 (06) :408-415
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1997, MAN STAG CANC
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2001, European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening
[4]   Breast cancer surveillance consortium: A national mammography screening and outcomes database [J].
BallardBarbash, R ;
Taplin, SH ;
Yankaskas, BC ;
Ernster, VL ;
Rosenberg, RD ;
Carney, PA ;
Barlow, WE ;
Geller, BM ;
Kerlikowske, K ;
Edwards, BK ;
Lynch, CF ;
Urban, N ;
Key, CR ;
Poplack, SP ;
Worden, JK ;
Kessler, LG .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1997, 169 (04) :1001-1008
[5]   Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists [J].
Barlow, WE ;
Chi, C ;
Carney, PA ;
Taplin, SH ;
D'Orsi, C ;
Cutter, G ;
Hendrick, RE ;
Elmore, JG .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2004, 96 (24) :1840-1850
[6]  
BASSETT LW, 1994, AHCPR PUBLICATION
[7]   Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists - Findings from a national sample [J].
Beam, CA ;
Layde, PM ;
Sullivan, DC .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1996, 156 (02) :209-213
[8]   Monitoring and evaluating the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme: evaluating the variation in radiological performance between individual programmes using PPV-referral diagrams [J].
Blanks, RG ;
Moss, SM ;
Wallis, MG .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2001, 8 (01) :24-28
[9]   Current medicolegal and confidentiality issues in large, multicenter research programs [J].
Carney, PA ;
Geller, BM ;
Moffett, H ;
Ganger, M ;
Sewell, M ;
Barlow, WE ;
Stalnaker, N ;
Teplin, SH ;
Sisk, C ;
Ernster, VL ;
Wilkie, HA ;
Yankaskas, B ;
Poplack, SP ;
Urban, N ;
West, MM ;
Rosenberg, RD ;
Michael, S ;
Mercurio, TD ;
Ballard-Barbash, R .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 152 (04) :371-378
[10]  
D'Orsi CJ, 2003, BREAST IMAGING REPOR, P229