Radiographer involvement in mammography image interpretation: A survey of United Kingdom practice

Breast cancer is most often diagnosed using x-ray mammography. Traditionally mammography images have been interpreted and reported by medically qualified practitioners – radiologists. Due to radiologist workforce shortages in recent years some non-medical practitioners, radiographers, now interpret and report mammography images. The aims of this survey were to describe the characteristics and practices of radiographers who interpret and report mammography images in NHS hospitals in the UK, and in particular to establish the extent of their practice beyond low-risk asymptomatic screening cases.This service evaluation demonstrated that UK radiographers are interpreting and reporting images across the full spectrum of clinical indications for mammography including: low-risk population screening, symptomatic, annual surveillance, family history and biopsy/surgical cases. The survey revealed that radiographers are involved in a diverse range of single and double reading practices where responsibility for diagnostic decision making is shared or transferred between radiologists and/or other radiographers. Comparative analysis of sub-group data suggested that there might be differences in the characteristics and practices of radiographers who interpret only low-risk screening mammograms and those who interpret and report a wider range of cases.The findings of this survey provide a platform for further research to investigate how and why the roles and responsibilities of radiographers who interpret and report mammograms vary between organisations, between practitioners and across different examinations. Further research is also needed to explore the implications of variation in practice for patients, practitioners and service providers.     

Screening mammography interpretation test: more frequent mistakes

PURPOSE: To present the mammographic cases most commonly misinterpreted by the participants in the mammography self-test proposed by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) National Congress in Rimini, Italy, 2002, by analysing the findings responsible for errors, suggesting reasons for the errors, and assessing possible inadequacies in the format of the test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The self-test was performed on the mammograms of 160 cases (32 positive and 128 negative for cancer as confirmed by histology). The mammograms had been taken in the four standard projections and placed on four multi-panel diaphanoscopes, each displaying a set of 40 cases comprising benign and malignant cases in equal proportions. The participants were given pre-printed forms on which to note down their diagnostic judgement. We evaluated a total of 134 fully-completed forms. Among these, we identified the 23 cases most frequently misread by over 15 participants in percentages varying between 40-90%. Of these cases, 10 were malignancies and 13 were negative mammograms. On review, we also assessed the diagnostic contribution of complementary investigations (not available the participants). RESULTS: The 134 fully-completed forms (all of the 40 cases) yielded a total of 5360 responses, 1180 of which (22.01%) were incorrect. Of these, 823 out of the 4288 cases expected to be negative (19.2%) were false positive, and 357 out of the 1072 cases expected to be positive (33.3%) were false negative. As regards the 23 most frequently misread cases, these were 10/32 (31.25%) mammograms positive for malignancy and 13/128 (10.15%) negative mammograms or mammograms showing benign disease. The 10 malignancies included 7 infiltrating ductal carcinomas, 1 infiltrating cribriform carcinoma, 1 infiltrating tubular carcinoma, and 1 carcinoma in situ. The 13 cases of benign disease--as established by histology or long-term follow-up--mistaken for malignancies by the test participants were fibrocystic breast disease in 5 cases, surgical scar in 1 case, ABBI scar in 1 case, radial scar in 2 cases, microcalcifications that had remained stable for years in 2 cases, focal sclero-adenosis in 1 case and sclero-elastosis in 1 case. CONCLUSIONS: The errors were due to microcalcifications, benign disease simulating a neoplasm, overlapping tissue, visibility of a lesion in one projection only, lesion site in relation to the corpus mammae, missed areas of asymmetry. Attention must be paid to these signs of focal breast disease since, if correctly evaluated, they enable the early diagnosis of low-grade carcinomas that frequently carry a favourable prognosis.     

Providing professional mammography services: financial analysis

PURPOSE: To perform a financial analysis of mammography services to determine whether the key underlying economic drivers of this service are aligned with the public's expectations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The financial status of mammography services at seven university-based programs was assessed by using an extensive financial survey encompassing revenue, direct and indirect costs, and volume data for 1997 and 1998. At one of the institutions, an activity-based costing analysis was performed by procedure type: screening mammography, diagnostic mammography, breast ultrasonography, interventional procedures, and review of outside mammograms. RESULTS: All seven institutions incurred losses in the professional component of mammography services. The underlying financial problem was a negative contribution margin (total mammography revenues minus direct expenses). The driver of the financial loss was the volume of diagnostic mammograms, which generated a loss per procedure. Diagnostic mammogram volume drove the mammography full-time equivalent count (P =.039) and was highly and negatively correlated with contribution margin (P <.001). CONCLUSION: The reimbursement rate for mammography procedures, especially diagnostic mammography, needs to be increased to reflect the current reality of the resources necessary to maintain the accessibility and accuracy of this evolving mix of clinical services.     

Ferrokinetics: methods and interpretation

The measurement of erythroid activity is based on the study of plasma iron kinetics. The radioiron injected should be bound specifically to transferrin, and the measurement of plasma 59Fe activity should be corrected for variation in plasma iron concentration. In addition, 59Fe-transferrin activity should be measured free of 59Fe-haemoglobin contamination. Analysis of the plasma 59Fe clearance curve over 14 days can give measures of total, effective and ineffective erythropoiesis, together with the red cell lifespan. Simpler ferrokinetic studies cannot be reliably used to assess erythropoiesis.     

CT colonography: visualization methods, interpretation, and pitfalls

Virtual colonoscopy interpretation is improving rapidly with the development of efficient software using two-dimensional, three-dimensional (3D) endoluminal, and 3D novel views such as those that seem to cut the colon open and lay it flat for interpretation. Comparison of these various views, comparisons of supine and prone positioning, and comparisons of lung and soft tissue windows aid in the recognition of various pitfalls of interpretation.     

Display of fused images: methods,interpretation, and diagnostic improvements

The use of integrated visualization for medical images aims at assisting clinicians in the difficult task of mentally translating and integrating medical image data from multiple sources into a three-dimensional (3D) representation of the patient. This interpretation of the enormous amount and complexity of contemporary, multiparameter, and multimodal image data demands efficient methods for integrated presentation. This article reviews methods for fused display with the main focus on integration of functional with anatomical images. First, an overview of integrated two-dimensional (2D) and 3D medical image display techniques is presented, and topics related to the interpretation of the integrated images are discussed. Then we address the key issue for clinical acceptance, ie, whether these novel visualization techniques lead to diagnostic improvements. Methods for fused display appear to be powerful tools to assist the clinician in the retrieval of relevant information from multivariate medical image data. Evaluation of the different methods for fused display indicates that the diagnostic process improves, notably as concerns the anatomical localization (typically of functional processes), the registration procedure, enhancement of signal, and efficiency of information presentation (which increases speed of interpretation and comprehension). Consequently, fused display improves communication with referring specialists, increases confidence in the observations, and facilitates the intra- and intersubject comparison of a large part of the data from the different sources, thereby simplifying the extraction of additional, valuable information. In most diagnostic tasks the clinician is served best by providing several (interactive and flexible) 2D and 3D methods for fused display for a thorough assessment of the wealth of image information from multiple sources.     

Audit procedures in the National Breast Screening Study: mammography interpretation

Audit procedures for mammography interpretation in a national breast cancer screening program are described. Agreement between radiologists at five screening centers and a single reference radiologist was evaluated based on mammograms at initial screen in 739 women not known to have breast cancer and 204 breast cancer cases detected at or within a year of initial screen. Kappa statistics, used to measure agreement in the interpretation of mammograms between the reference and center radiologists beyond that attributable to chance, were 0.409 in women not known to have breast cancer, 0.472 in women with diagnosed breast cancer, and 0.493 for all women with p less than .0001 for all three categories. To our knowledge, this is the first report presenting measures of agreement made systematically, simultaneously, and on a continuing basis, during a screening program for quality assurance.     

Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to determine the rates and causes of disagreements in interpretation between full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing diagnostic mammography were invited to participate in the digital mammography study. Three views, selected by the radiologist interpreting the film-screen mammography, were obtained in both film-screen mammography and digital mammography. Radiologists independently assigned a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category to the film-screen mammography and the digital mammography images. The BI-RADS categories were grouped into the general categories of agreement, partial agreement, or disagreement. A third and different radiologist reviewed all cases of disagreement, reached a decision as to management, and determined the primary cause of disagreement. RESULTS: Six radiologists reviewed digital mammography and film-screen mammography diagnostic images in a total of 1147 breasts in 692 patients. Agreement between digital mammography and final film-screen mammography assessment was present in 937 breasts (82%), partial agreement in 159 (14%), and disagreement in 51 (4%), for a kappa value of 0.29. The primary causes of disagreement were differences in management approach of the radiologists (52%), information derived from sonography or additional film-screen mammograms (34%), and technical differences between the two mammographic techniques (10%). CONCLUSION: Significant disagreement between film-screen mammography and digital mammography affecting follow-up management was present in only 4% of breasts. The most frequent cause of disagreement in interpretation was a difference in management approach between radiologists (interobserver variability). This source of variability was larger than that due to differences in lesion visibility between film-screen mammography and digital mammography.     

Development of mammography and breast services in a community hospital

The growth and development of mammography and related breast services in one community hospital are chronicled and described. With mammography providing the initial stimulus, substantial growth, diversification, and sophistication in diagnosis and treatment of breast disease have developed. The achievement of a cooperative and mutually supportive relationship among radiologists, pathologists, and surgeons committed to the goal of early detection of potentially curable breast cancer has succeeded in identifying increasing numbers of such lesions. The more frequent employment of breast-sparing surgical procedures and the encouraging survival rates in patients detected and treated for these early lesions represents an important contribution to the care of these women. Improvement in the detection of early breast cancer can be achieved by community radiologists, whether in private hospitals or office-based practices.     

Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases.

The authors conducted a complete audit of results of 38,633 mammographic examinations performed by 12 general radiologists during a 2-year period with a computerized reporting system. During this period, 11 group members attended 17 dedicated mammography courses. Audit results were analyzed for each radiologist and the entire group. In the 2nd year, the number of breast cancers diagnosed increased 50% (from 121 to 181), with a 6.5% increase in patient volume. Sensitivity increased from 80% to 87%, and there was no change in the positive predictive value of 32%. Median tumor size and node positivity decreased. Most major variables of population and technical factors were unchanged. Diagnostic approach was altered during the 2nd year, as shown by a 50% increase in the use of spot compression, magnification views, and sonography. Analysis of each radiologist's performance before and after attending mammography courses showed similar changes. These data suggest that dedicated mammography courses can help improve radiologists' performance and alter their interpretive approach.     

Contrast mammography in clinical practice: Current uses and potential diagnostic dilemmas

ObjectiveThis article will discuss the indications for Contrast Enhanced Spectral Mammography (CESM) with a focus on imaging interpretation including diagnostic dilemmas and pitfalls which may be encountered in practice.ConclusionUnderstanding potential diagnostic dilemmas and pitfalls of CESM allows for enhanced interpretation.The clinical utilization of Contrast Enhanced Spectral Mammography (CESM) has increased significantly over the last few years. CESM demonstrates comparable sensitivity and accuracy to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the evaluation of breast cancer but is less time consuming and less expensive. Because of this, CESM is now being used in lieu of MRI for many diagnostic indicators including the evaluation of abnormal mammographic findings, extent of disease, and response to neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, ongoing research into the role of CESM in asymptomatic screening for breast cancer is evolving. As this technique becomes more popular, focusing on appropriate technique and interpretation is important. This article reviews the current and potential roles of CESM. It provides examples of CESM utilized for diagnostic indications while highlighting diagnostic dilemmas, pitfalls, and artifacts that may be encountered when interpreting CESM images.     

Communication in the diagnostic mammography suite: implications for practice and training

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The diagnostic mammography suite is a microcosm of challenging physician-patient communication in radiology. Little has been written about communication practices in the diagnostic mammography suite, the effect of this communication on both physicians and patients, and implications for radiology training programs. We surveyed radiology residents and staff about communication training, practices, and experiences communicating directly with patients in the diagnostic mammography suite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We asked the membership of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology to disseminate surveys to radiology residents and staff radiologists in their institutions. We analyzed response frequencies and correlations. RESULTS: We received responses from 142 residents and 120 staff radiologists. More than half of staff respondents spoke personally with every patient who had an abnormal diagnostic mammogram; 37% felt they had inadequate time to do so. Most residents and staff highly rated their own communication skills and confidence in ability to explain results and respond to patients' emotions, but experienced stress doing so. A majority of respondents reported no formal communication skills education after medical school. Twenty-nine percent of staff respondents regularly observed residents' communication with patients and 39% of residents reported receiving feedback about their communication. Residents' opportunities to observe staff communicate with a patient and to receive feedback on their own patient interactions were correlated with self-rated communication skill and confidence in ability to respond to patients' emotions (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists engage in challenging and stressful patient communication interactions. There is a paucity of educational curricula on interpersonal and communication skills in radiology. This has implications for both patient and physician satisfaction and patient outcomes.     

Challenges in mammography: part 1, artifacts in digital mammography

OBJECTIVE: Early detection of breast cancer is directly related to the radiologist's ability to detect abnormalities visible only on mammograms. Artifacts on mammograms reduce image quality and may present clinical and technical difficulties for the radiologist, mammography technologist, medical physicist, and equipment service personnel. CONCLUSION: In this article, we will illustrate the appearance of artifacts in full field digital mammography, review the causes of these artifacts, and discuss methods to eliminate artifacts in digital mammography.     

Contrast-enhanced mammography: past,present, and future

Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) combines conventional mammography with iodinated contrast material to improve cancer detection. CEM has comparable performance to breast MRI without the added cost or time of conventional MRI protocols. Thus, this technique may be useful for indications previously reserved for MRI, such as problem-solving, determining disease extent in patients with newly diagnosed cancer, monitoring response to neoadjuvant therapy, evaluating the posttreatment breast for residual or recurrent disease, and potentially screening in women at intermediate- or high-risk for breast cancer. This article will provide a comprehensive overview on the past, present, and future of CEM, including its evolving role in the diagnostic and screening settings.