Introduction of additional double reading of mammograms by radiographers: effects on a biennial screening programme outcome
- PMID: 18400488
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.03.003
Introduction of additional double reading of mammograms by radiographers: effects on a biennial screening programme outcome
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the effect of introducing radiographer double reading, in addition to standard radiologist double reading, on screening mammography outcome.
Methods: In period A, 66,225 mammograms were read by two screening radiologists. In period B, 78,325 mammograms were read by two radiographers in addition and radiologists were blinded to the referral opinion of the radiographers. Mammograms, for which only radiographers had suggested referral, (i.e. cases that would only be referred by technologists) were re-evaluated by the screening radiologists. Women were referred if at least one radiologist considered this necessary, and diagnostic costs of these additional referrals were estimated.
Results: In period A, 322 cancers were diagnosed after referral of 678 women. During period B, radiologists initially referred 1122 patients and 411 cancers were detected. Radiologists' referral rate was higher in period B than in period A (1.43% versus 1.02%, p<0.001), as well as the cancer detection rate per 1000 women screened (CDR) (5.25 versus 4.86, p=0.3). The positive predictive value of referral (PPV) was 36.6% versus 47.5% (p<0.001). In period B, radiologist review of 544 additional positive radiographer readings led to 102 extra referrals, with 29 additional cancers detected, resulting in an overall referral rate of 1.56% (compared to period A, p<0.001), an overall CDR of 5.62 (p=0.048) and an overall PPV of 35.9% (p<0.001). Workup expenses of the 102 additional referrals were euro60,274.
Conclusion: Additional radiographer double reading detected cancers that would have been missed by radiologists. Mean expenses for diagnostic confirmation of these extra cancers was euro2078 per cancer.
Similar articles
-
Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Aug 1;99(15):1162-70. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm050. Epub 2007 Jul 24. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007. PMID: 17652282
-
Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.Eur J Cancer. 2015 Feb;51(3):391-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.12.008. Epub 2015 Jan 5. Eur J Cancer. 2015. PMID: 25573788
-
Inter-observer variability in mammography screening and effect of type and number of readers on screening outcome.Br J Cancer. 2009 Mar 24;100(6):901-7. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604954. Epub 2009 Mar 3. Br J Cancer. 2009. PMID: 19259088 Free PMC article.
-
Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls.Radiographics. 2003 Jul-Aug;23(4):881-95. doi: 10.1148/rg.234025083. Radiographics. 2003. PMID: 12853663 Review.
-
Use of artificial intelligence for image analysis in breast cancer screening programmes: systematic review of test accuracy.BMJ. 2021 Sep 1;374:n1872. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n1872. BMJ. 2021. PMID: 34470740 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Evaluation of radiographers' mammography screen-reading accuracy in Australia.J Med Radiat Sci. 2015 Mar;62(1):15-22. doi: 10.1002/jmrs.59. Epub 2014 Aug 6. J Med Radiat Sci. 2015. PMID: 26229663 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluating radiographers' diagnostic accuracy in screen-reading mammograms: what constitutes a quality study?J Med Radiat Sci. 2015 Mar;62(1):23-31. doi: 10.1002/jmrs.68. Epub 2014 Aug 14. J Med Radiat Sci. 2015. PMID: 26229664 Free PMC article.
-
The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.Acad Radiol. 2015 Mar;22(3):278-89. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.09.013. Epub 2014 Nov 27. Acad Radiol. 2015. PMID: 25435185 Free PMC article.
-
Diagnostic Efficacy of Five Different Imaging Modalities in the Assessment of Women Recalled at Breast Screening-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers (Basel). 2024 Oct 17;16(20):3505. doi: 10.3390/cancers16203505. Cancers (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39456600 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Characteristics of screen-detected cancers following concordant or discordant recalls at blinded double reading in biennial digital screening mammography.Eur Radiol. 2019 Jan;29(1):337-344. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5586-9. Epub 2018 Jun 25. Eur Radiol. 2019. PMID: 29943181
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical