This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Keywords:
Breast, Mammography, Screening, Audit and standards, Education and training, Quality assurance
Authors:
C. E. Mercer1, K. Szczepura1, J. Kelly2, S. Millington2, E. Denton3, R. Borgen4, B. Hilton4, P. Hogg1; 1Manchester/UK, 2Chester/UK, 3Norwich/UK, 4Lancs/UK
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2015/B-1026
Conclusion
DEMONSTRATED IMPACT ON CLIENT EXPERIENCE
We have demonstrated that practitioners across three breast screening sites behave differently in the application of compression force when undertaking mammography.
Two of the three sites demonstrate variability.
Variability within these two sites and between the three sites could result in variations in image quality,
radiation dose,
re-attendance rates and client experience20.
IMPACT ON MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGES
Direct comparison between images on successive screens is vital to ensure accurate visualisation of subtle changes within the breast. We have demonstrated that compression force and beast thickness differences exist between and within sites,
the latter could influence image quality.
If differences in quality exist for the same client then this could confound comparison of images on successive screens 20.
RE-ATTENDANCE AND STANDARDS
Pain and non-re-attendance are related3 and a standardised approach to compression force levels within a specified range is required to offer clients a consistent expectation and experience.
Further research is needed into client pain and levels of applied compression force20.
A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE
A recent study by de Groot and colleagues19 questioned if standardisation by compression force was meaningful and they suggested a focus towards pressure.
At present clients with small breasts experience more pressure than clients with large breasts with the same applied compression force.
They suggested standardisation based upon pressure which shows great promise20.