Literature DB >> 2702588

Physical examination. Its role as a single screening modality in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study.

C J Baines1, A B Miller, A A Bassett.   

Abstract

Although often recommended as an important component in screening for breast cancer, physical examination of the breasts (PE) by medical professionals has not been well evaluated. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study (NBSS) permits estimation of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of PE alone as performed by screen-examiners because 50% of the 89,835 NBSS participants did not receive mammography. There were 19,965 women aged from 50 to 59 years who were eligible to receive four or five annual PEs from 77 nurse-examiners, in 12 screen centers outside Quebec province and 58 physician-examiners in three screen centers in Quebec. The gold standard was histologically proven breast cancer. When a test was positive the participant was referred to the study surgeon for review. For screens one to five, sensitivity was 83, 71, 57, 83, and 77; specificity was 88, 94, 96, 96, and 96; and PPV was 3, 3, 4, 3, and 4, respectively. For 25,620 women aged 40 to 49 years who were eligible to receive only one PE, sensitivity was 71, specificity 84, and PPV 1.5. Using a binomial regression model, X2 for heterogeneity suggested there was no difference between nurse and physician examiners (P = 0.6879). Similar estimates made for the surgeons who performed 8914 reviews showed that sensitivity and PPV were higher than for the screen examiners and specificity was lower. These results support the conclusion that physical examination of the breasts by trained nurses is a useful component in screening for breast cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2702588     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900501)63:9<1816::aid-cncr2820630926>3.0.co;2-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  19 in total

Review 1.  Is clinical breast examination an acceptable alternative to mammographic screening?

Authors:  I Mittra; M Baum; H Thornton; J Houghton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-10-28

2.  The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a clinician's perspective.

Authors:  A A Starreveld
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Detection and description of small breast masses by residents trained using a standardized clinical breast exam curriculum.

Authors:  Elizabeth Steiner; Donald F Austin; Nancy C Prouser
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-12-04       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Lump detection is enhanced in silicone breast models simulating postmenopausal breast tissue.

Authors:  M M McDermott; N C Dolan; J Huang; D Reifler; A W Rademaker
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 5.  Breast cancer screening: an evidence-based update.

Authors:  Mackenzie S Fuller; Christoph I Lee; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 5.456

Review 6.  Redefining the sensitivity of screening mammography: A review.

Authors:  Alan B Hollingsworth
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  Preventive health care, 1999 update: 3. Follow-up after breast cancer. Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

Authors:  L K Temple; E E Wang; R S McLeod
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-10-19       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  A brief intervention designed to increase breast cancer self-screening.

Authors:  Nangel M Lindberg; Victor J Stevens; K Sabina Smith; Russell E Glasgow; Deborah J Toobert
Journal:  Am J Health Promot       Date:  2009 May-Jun

9.  Management of women at increased risk for breast cancer: preliminary results from a new program.

Authors:  P L Chart; E Franssen
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1997-11-01       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Improving clinical breast examination training in a medical school: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  C Pilgrim; C Lannon; R P Harris; W Cogburn; S W Fletcher
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.