Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography
Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography
复制标题
DOI：
10.1148/radiol.2353040738
复制
发表时间：
2005-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
19.7
通讯作者：
Yankaskas, BC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sickles, EA;Miglioretti, DL;Yankaskas, BC
目的：评估一系列与诊断性乳房X光检查综合审计相关的性能参数，并通过汇集从可能代表美国乳房X光检查实践的大量患者和放射科医生收集的数据，从中得出性能基准。材料和方法：机构审查委员会批准，不需要知情同意。这项研究符合《健康保险携带和责任法案》的规定。六个乳房X光检查登记机构向乳腺癌监测联盟(BCSC)提供数据，提供患者人口统计和临床信息、乳房X光检查解释数据以及确定的以人群为基础的集水区的活检结果。这项研究涉及151家乳房X光检查机构和646名翻译放射科医生。研究人群包括在1996年至2001年期间至少接受过一次诊断性乳房X光检查的18岁或以上的女性。收集的数据用于计算平均性能参数值，包括异常解释率、阳性预测值(异常解释率、活检建议和活检)、癌症诊断率、浸润性癌大小、微小癌、腋窝淋巴结阴性浸润性癌以及0期和1期癌的百分比。这些性能参数的其他基准包括第10、第25、第50(中位数)、第75和第90百分位值。结果：研究涉及332 926次诊断性乳房X光检查。平均指标：异常判断率为8.0%；异常判读阳性预测值为31.4%；活检阳性预测值为39.5%；肿瘤诊断率为25.3/1000；浸润性癌大小为20.2 mm；微小癌百分率为42.0%；腋窝淋巴结阴性浸润性癌百分率为73.6%，0、1期乳腺癌的百分率为62.4%。(C)RSNA，2005年。
Purpose : to evaluate a range of performance parameters pertinent to the comprehensive auditing of diagnostic mammography examinations, and to derive performance benchmarks there from, by pooling data collected from large numbers of patients and radiologists that are likely to be representative of mammography practice in the United States.Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval was met, informed consent was not required. and this study was Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant. Six mammography registries contributed data to the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC), providing patient demographic and clinical information, mammogram interpretation data, and biopsy results from defined population-based catchment areas. The study involved 151 mammography facilities and 646 interpreting radiologists. The study population included women 18 years of age or older who underwent at least one diagnostic mammography examination between 1996 and 2001. Collected data was used to derive mean performance parameter values, including abnormal interpretation rate, positive predictive value (for abnormal interpretation rate, biopsy recommended, and biopsy performed), cancer diagnosis rate, invasive cancer size, and the percentage of minimal cancers, axillary node- negative invasive cancers, and the stage 0 and 1 cancers. Additional benchmarks were derived for these performance parameters, including 10th, 25th, 50th (median), 75th, and 90th percentile values.Results : The study involved 332 926 diagnostic mammography examinations. Mean performance parameter, values were abnormal interpretation rate, 8.0%; positive predictive value for abnormal interpretation, 31.4%; positive predictive value for biopsy performed, 39.5%; cancer diagnosis rate, 25.3 per 1000 examinations; invasive cancer size, 20.2 mm; percentage of minimal cancers, 42.0%; percentage of axillary node-negative invasive cancers, 73.6% and percentage of stage 0 and 1 cancers 62.4%.Conclusions : The presented BCSC outcomes data and performacne becnhmarks may be used by mammography facilities and individual radiologists to evaluate their own performance for diagnostic mammography as determined by means of periodic comprehensive audits. (c) RSNA, 2005.