We have located links that may give you full text access.
Breast US: assessment of technical quality and image interpretation.
Radiology 2002 April
PURPOSE: To determine whether ultrasonography (US) of the breast performed at a wide range of clinical practices conforms to the American College of Radiology (ACR) standards for quality and to assess the interpretations of breast sonograms.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Static images from 152 breast US examinations performed at 86 institutions were evaluated for compliance with ACR guidelines for breast US hardware, technical factors, imaging protocol, and image annotation. Official interpretations submitted by the referring facilities were compared with static images submitted by the facility. Discrepancies were confirmed by two dedicated breast radiologists after repeat imaging, short-interval follow-up imaging, or biopsy.
RESULTS: A total of 60.5% of cases did not comply with at least one ACR guideline on breast US and included 9.2% of cases with inadequate equipment, 14.7% of cases with inappropriate focal zone placement, at least 14% of cases with static images in only one imaging plane, and 25% of cases with incomplete patient identifiers. Clinically relevant interpretation errors and interpretation discrepancies were confirmed in 23 (15.1%) of 152 cases.
CONCLUSION: The majority of breast US examinations did not comply with at least some of the standards for quality set forth by the ACR. Attention to these basic standards could substantially improve image quality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Static images from 152 breast US examinations performed at 86 institutions were evaluated for compliance with ACR guidelines for breast US hardware, technical factors, imaging protocol, and image annotation. Official interpretations submitted by the referring facilities were compared with static images submitted by the facility. Discrepancies were confirmed by two dedicated breast radiologists after repeat imaging, short-interval follow-up imaging, or biopsy.
RESULTS: A total of 60.5% of cases did not comply with at least one ACR guideline on breast US and included 9.2% of cases with inadequate equipment, 14.7% of cases with inappropriate focal zone placement, at least 14% of cases with static images in only one imaging plane, and 25% of cases with incomplete patient identifiers. Clinically relevant interpretation errors and interpretation discrepancies were confirmed in 23 (15.1%) of 152 cases.
CONCLUSION: The majority of breast US examinations did not comply with at least some of the standards for quality set forth by the ACR. Attention to these basic standards could substantially improve image quality.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Should renin-angiotensin system inhibitors be held prior to major surgery?British Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 May
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app