An initial exploration of factors that may impact radiographer performance in reporting mammograms

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVES: In the United Kingdom, radiographers with a qualification in image interpretation have interpreted mammograms since 1995. These radiographers work under the title of radiography advanced practitioners (RAP) or Consultant Radiographer. This study extends upon what has been very recently published by exploring further clinical, non-clinical and experiential factors that may impact the reporting performance of RAPs. METHODS: Fifteen RAPs interpreted an image test set of 60 2D mammograms of known truth using the Detected-X software platform. Unknown to the reader, twenty cases contained a malignancy. Sensitivity, specificity, lesion sensitivity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and jack-knife free response operating characteristic (AFROC) values were established for each RAP. Specific features that had significant impact on accuracy were identified using Student's-T and Mann Whitney tests. RESULTS: RAPs with more than 10 years' experience in image interpretation, compared to those with less than 10 years' experience, demonstrated lower specificity (51.3% vs 84.8%, p = 0.0264), ROC (0.83 vs 0.91, p = 0.0264) and AFROC (0.75 vs 0.87, p = 0.0037) values. Further, higher sensitivity values of 90.7% were seen in those RAPs who had an eye test in the last year compared to those who had not, 82% (p = 0.021). Other changes are presented in the paper. CONCLUSION: These data reveal previously unidentified factors that impact the diagnostic efficacy of RAPs when interpreting mammographic images. Highlighting such findings will empower screening authorities to better examine ways of standardising performance and offer a baseline for performance benchmarks. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study for the first time performs an initial exploration of the factors that may be associated with RAP performance when interpreting screening mammograms.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.