Literature DB >> 2788213

How do women compare with internal medicine residents in breast lump detection? A study with silicone models.

S W Fletcher1, M S O'Malley, C A Pilgrim, J J Gonzalez.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Manufactured silicone breast models were used to compare the accuracy of breast examination by 300 women and 62 internal medicine residents.
DESIGN: The study design was cross-sectional.
SETTING: The study took place in two teaching-hospital general medicine clinics. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Women were continuing care patients, ages 40 to 68, with no current breast complaint; 300 of 467 (66%) randomly selected women participated. Physicians were internal medicine residents with at least one-half day per week of ambulatory care practice; 62 of 64 (97%) participated.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sensitivity equalled the percentage of 18 lumps correctly detected in examination of six silicone breast models. Specificity equalled the percentage of six models examined without a false-positive detection. Women's sensitivity was lower than physicians' (40% vs. 58%), but their specificity was higher (66% vs. 52%). For both women and physicians, sensitivity varied according to lump size, hardness, and depth, with women's sensitivity lower than physicians' for each characteristic. Examination duration was the technique most strongly and consistently related to accuracy. Physicians spent more time examining models than did women (2.5 vs. 2.1 minutes per model). For both groups duration related positively to sensitivity (r = 0.46, women; 0.55, physicians) and negatively to specificity (r = -0.35, women; -0.59, physicians). After adjusting for differences in technique, women's sensitivity remained lower than physicians', whereas specificity generally remained higher. The sensitivity of physicians with prior tactile experience with breast lumps was higher than that of physicians without such experience (60% vs. 51%, p = 0.01). Too few women (2%) had prior tactile experience to permit analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Women's and physicians' breast examination accuracies differ, but for the two groups accuracies vary similarly by lump characteristics and examination technique. Programs to improve breast examination should focus on specificity as well as sensitivity. Training that includes tactile experience may be important.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2788213     DOI: 10.1007/bf02597396

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  14 in total

1.  Is breast self-examination predicted by knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, or sociodemographic characteristics?

Authors:  S W Fletcher; T M Morgan; M S O'Malley; J A Earp; D Degnan
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1989 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.043

2.  Increased proficiency of search in breast self-examination.

Authors:  K J Saunders; C A Pilgrim; H S Pennypacker
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1986-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 3.  US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer with breast self-examination. A critical review.

Authors:  M S O'Malley; S W Fletcher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1987-04-24       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The use of diagnostic tests for screening and evaluating breast lesions. Health and Public Policy Committee, American College of Physicians.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Physicians' abilities to detect lumps in silicone breast models.

Authors:  S W Fletcher; M S O'Malley; L A Bunce
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1985-04-19       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Early detection of breast cancer. Council on Scientific Affairs.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1984-12-07       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality.

Authors:  S Shapiro; W Venet; P Strax; L Venet; R Roeser
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report.

Authors:  L H Baker
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 508.702

9.  Predictors of proficient technique and successful lesion detection in breast self-examination.

Authors:  S W Alagna; D M Reddy
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 4.267

10.  Improved detection of human breast lesions following experimental training.

Authors:  D C Hall; C K Adams; G H Stein; H S Stephenson; M K Goldstein; H S Pennypacker
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1980-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  6 in total

1.  Making behavioral technology transferable.

Authors:  H S Pennypacker; L L Hench
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  1997

2.  Addressing women's breast cancer risk and perceptions of control in medical settings.

Authors:  R Royak-Schaler; B Cheuvront; K R Wilson; C M Williams
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  1996-09

3.  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 4.  Preventive health care, 2001 update: should women be routinely taught breast self-examination to screen for breast cancer?

Authors:  N Baxter
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-06-26       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Rescuing the Clinical Breast Examination: Advances in Classifying Technique and Assessing Physician Competency.

Authors:  Shlomi Laufer; Anne-Lise D D'Angelo; Calvin Kwan; Rebbeca D Ray; Rachel Yudkowsky; John R Boulet; William C McGaghie; Carla M Pugh
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Evaluation of the Efficacy of Clinical Breast Examination Gloves in the Diagnosis of Breast Lumps.

Authors:  Vanessa Monteiro Sanvido; Andrea Yumi Watanabe; Joaquim Teodoro de Araújo Neto; Simone Elias; Gil Facina; Afonso Celso Pinto Nazário
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-06-01
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.