This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Type:
Educational Exhibit
Keywords:
Breast, Mammography, Ultrasound, Percutaneous, Education, Biopsy, Outcomes analysis, Cancer, Education and training, Quality assurance
Authors:
S. A. Saeed, I. Masroor; Karachi/PK
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2015/C-2267
Findings and procedure details
Methods:
This cross sectional analytical study was conducted in the department of Radiology at Aga Khan University hospital in August 2014.
Participants from different institutes of the province-Sindh with interest in breast imaging attending the breast imaging workshop conducted during the Breast Symposium in October 2013 were included.
There were two groups of participants; one group completed both the pre/post test.
The other group comprised of participants who only attempted post test.
The pre-post test consisted of ten multiple choice questions covering different aspects of breast imaging.
Pretest was administered,
followed by lectures and interactive sessions covering the topics of mammography,
breast ultrasound,
breast MRI and role of nuclear medicine in breast work up.
Breast interventions session covered biopsies and needle localization procedures along with hands-on experience.
(Images 1 to 8 taken from the different presentations of the course) This was followed by post test to evaluate the knowledge and understanding gained through the workshop.
Data was entered using SPSS version 20.0 and analyzed using matched paired t-test.
Result:
A total of 43 physician doctors participated in the workshop.34 were from radiology department and 9 belonged to other specialties like medical oncology and radiotherapy.18 were employed in private sector and 25 were from public sector.
Out of the total number of participants 18 were consultants and 25 were trainees.(table 1)
Group I attempted both the pre and post test .The mean pretest score being 3.86 and post test score was 6.07.The mean post test score of group II ( those that only attempted post test ) was 5.13.( table 2) The improvement of mean test score in group I was significant with p value of .000 ( table 3)
Table 1
Trainees /faculty
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Trainees
|
25
|
58
|
Faculty
|
18
|
42
|
Specialty
|
|
|
Radiology
|
34
|
79
|
Others
|
09
|
21
|
Table 2
|
Group I -Pretest
|
Group I- Post Test
|
Group II Post test
|
Mean Score
|
3.86
|
6.07
|
5.13
|
Standard Deviation
|
1.55
|
1.44
|
1.24
|
Minimum score
|
1.00
|
3.00
|
3.00
|
Maximum score
|
8.00
|
9.00
|
8.00
|
Table 3
Paired Samples Test
|
|
Paired Differences
|
t
|
df
|
Sig.
(2-tailed)
|
Mean
|
Std.
Deviation
|
Std.
Error Mean
|
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
|
Lower
|
Upper
|
Pair 1
|
pretest - postest
|
-2.19231
|
1.47022
|
.28833
|
-2.78614
|
-1.59847
|
-7.603
|
25
|
.000
|