Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Br J Radiol ; 94(1117): 20200423, 2021 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32976025

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to explore the perceptions of advanced practice radiographers (APRs) currently giving benign biopsy results to extend their role to deliver NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) malignant outcomes. In the UK, APRs are appropriately trained to deliver results, yet traditionally have been cultured not to. Increasing pressures on NHSBSP units are a key driver for APR evolvement. A significant lack of published research provides the rationale for the study, combined with an identified service need. METHODS: Following ethical approval, a grounded theory design was applied to interview six APRs individually in a single breast screening unit. Extracted themes were considered during a subsequent focus group. RESULTS: Five core themes identified; (i) role of the APR, (ii) patient experience, (iii) efficiency, (iv) role boundaries, and (v) delivering results.The findings indicate the ambiguity of radiographers delivering results within their profession, outlining the potential impact on themselves and patients. Mammography APRs are skilled to deliver results, and whilst enforced barriers may restrict extension a supportive environment can overcome these. Additional training is necessary to implement the role in the screening service. CONCLUSION: Identified within their scope of practice; APRs have the ability with appropriate training and peer support to effectively deliver results with a patient-centred approach. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study has identified important enabling factors and challenges concerning role extension in the delivery of breast biopsy results. The apparent suitability of APRs to communicate results may address breast service pressures, with benefit to patients and the radiology profession.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Health Communication/methods , Health Personnel/psychology , Mammography/psychology , Professional Role/psychology , Adult , Biopsy , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Diagnosis, Differential , Female , Grounded Theory , Humans , Mammography/methods , Middle Aged , United Kingdom
2.
BJR Case Rep ; 6(2): 20190131, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33029381

ABSTRACT

This case reports on secondary extramedullary multiple myeloma within both breasts in the absence of axillary nodal involvement and discusses the difficulty in interpretation with clinical recommendations and learning outcomes. Differentiating plasmacytic lesions in the breast is often difficult as clinical and radiological appearances are known to mimic benignity and high-grade primary breast cancer. Extramedullary presentation can determine progression of the disease and can necessitate cross-sectional imaging. Therefore definitive diagnosis is essential as the clinical management of the patient may be altered.

3.
Br J Radiol ; 90(1071): 20160271, 2017 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28134567

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Blurred images in full-field digital mammography are a problem in the UK Breast Screening Programme. Technical recalls may be due to blurring not being seen on lower resolution monitors used for review. This study assesses the visual detection of blurring on a 2.3-MP monitor and a 5-MP report grade monitor and proposes an observer standard for the visual detection of blurring on a 5-MP reporting grade monitor. METHODS: 28 observers assessed 120 images for blurring; 20 images had no blurring present, whereas 100 images had blurring imposed through mathematical simulation at 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 mm levels of motion. Technical recall rate for both monitors and angular size at each level of motion were calculated. χ2 tests were used to test whether significant differences in blurring detection existed between 2.3- and 5-MP monitors. RESULTS: The technical recall rate for 2.3- and 5-MP monitors are 20.3% and 9.1%, respectively. The angular size for 0.2- to 1-mm motion varied from 55 to 275 arc s. The minimum amount of motion for visual detection of blurring in this study is 0.4 mm. For 0.2-mm simulated motion, there was no significant difference [χ2 (1, N = 1095) = 1.61, p = 0.20] in blurring detection between the 2.3- and 5-MP monitors. CONCLUSION: According to this study, monitors ≤2.3 MP are not suitable for technical review of full-field digital mammography images for the detection of blur. Advances in knowledge: This research proposes the first observer standard for the visual detection of blurring.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Mammography/methods , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Observer Variation , Reproducibility of Results , United Kingdom
4.
Radiol Technol ; 85(6): 609-13, 2014.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25002640

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Breast density categorization consistency is important when performing research, and minimization of interoperator and intraoperator variability is essential. This research aimed to validate a set of mammography images for visual breast density estimation to achieve consistency in future research projects and to determine observer performance. METHODS: Using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) as the visual grading scale, 50 mammography images were scored for density grade by 8 observers. RESULTS: Six of 8 observers achieved near-complete intraobserver agreement (kappa > 0.81). Strong agreement among observers (kappa = 0.61-0.8) was found in 10 of 28 paired observation episodes on the first iteration and 12 of 28 on the second. No observers demonstrated a delta variance above 1. Fleiss' kappa was used to evaluate concordance among all observers on the first and second iterations (first iteration, 0.64; second iteration, 0.56). DISCUSSION: This research illustrates the difficulties of comparing observer visual performance scores because differences can exist when studies are repeated by and among individuals. CONCLUSION: We confirmed that the 50 images were suitable for research purposes. Some variability existed among observers; however, overall density classification agreement was strong. Future research should include repeating this study with digitally acquired images.


Subject(s)
Absorptiometry, Photon/standards , Databases, Factual/standards , Guidelines as Topic , Mammography/methods , Mammography/standards , Visual Analog Scale , Female , Humans , Observer Variation , Radiology Information Systems/standards , Reference Values , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL