Literature DB >> 28764277

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

Vanessa Monteiro Sanvido1, Andrea Yumi Watanabe1, Joaquim Teodoro de Araújo Neto1, Simone Elias1, Gil Facina2, Afonso Celso Pinto Nazário3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies have questioned the efficacy of mammography in reducing breast cancer-related mortality. Additionally, the efficacies of commercially available gloves marketed as aiding the detection of breast lumps have not been independently verified. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of clinical breast examination gloves in the detection of breast lumps.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the period from October 2011 to June 2012, patients were submitted to clinical examination with and without gloves. This prospective study involved 202 patients who underwent conventional clinical breast examination (test 1) or clinical breast examination with Sensifemme® gloves (test 2). All patients underwent subsequent bilateral ultrasonography (test 3) to confirm the findings of the physical examinations. The Chi-square test was used to compare values, while the kappa concordance index was used to determine the concordance between the diagnostic tests.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 43 years; 298 breast lumps were detected. In the clinical examination group (test 1), sensitivity was 54%, specificity was 78%, and accuracy was 57%. These rates for clinical breast examinations with gloves (test 2) were 68%, 58%, and 66%, respectively. The glove increased the diagnosis of breast nodules by 14%; the rate of false-positives was also higher (42% for test 2 compared to 22% for test 1). The accuracy of the glove was found to be superior to clinical examination after 100 patients had been examined. The kappa indices for test 1 vs. test 3 and for test 2 vs. test 3 were 0.15 and 0.16, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Clinical examination using the glove was more effective than clinical examination with bare hands for the diagnosis of breast lumps, as it increased the sensitivity and accuracy of lump detection. However, this was at the expense of a higher false-positive rate, which can lead to further tests, unnecessary biopsies, and patient anxiety. The concordance of clinical examination results (whether performed with or without the glove) with those of ultrasonography is weak. Moreover, the glove has a steep learning curve that may discourage its use in certain circumstances.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasms; Mammography; Physical examination; Self-examination

Year:  2017        PMID: 28764277      PMCID: PMC5535467          DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/25504.9987

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res        ISSN: 0973-709X


  22 in total

1.  [Results of a prospective randomized investigation [Russia (St.Petersburg)/WHO] to evaluate the significance of self-examination for the early detection of breast cancer].

Authors:  V F Semiglazov; A G Manikhas; V M Moiseenko; S A Protsenko; R S Kharikova; I K Seleznev; R T Popova; N Sh Migmanova; A A Orlov; N Iu Barash; O A Ivanova; V G Ivanov
Journal:  Vopr Onkol       Date:  2003

2.  [Randomized trial of breast self-examination in 266,064 women in Shanghai].

Authors:  Dao-li Gao; David B Thomas; Roberta M Ray; Wen-wan Wang; Charlene J Allison; Fan-liang Chen; Peggy Porter; Yong-wei Hu; Guan-lin Zhao; Lei-da Pan; Wen-jin Li; Chun-yuan Wu; Zakia Coriaty; Ilonka Evans; Ming-gang Lin; Helge Stalsberg; Steven G Self
Journal:  Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi       Date:  2005-06

Review 3.  Breast cancer early detection methods for low and middle income countries, a review of the evidence.

Authors:  Marilys Corbex; Robert Burton; Hélène Sancho-Garnier
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 4.380

Review 4.  Update on screening breast ultrasonography.

Authors:  Ginger M Merry; Ellen B Mendelson
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.303

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

Authors:  S W Fletcher; M S O'Malley; C A Pilgrim; J J Gonzalez
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Is clinical breast examination important for breast cancer detection?

Authors:  L Provencher; J C Hogue; C Desbiens; B Poirier; E Poirier; D Boudreau; M Joyal; C Diorio; N Duchesne; J Chiquette
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 7.  Regular self-examination or clinical examination for early detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  J P Kösters; P C Gøtzsche
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2003

8.  How accurate is ultrasound in evaluating palpable breast masses?

Authors:  Mubuuke Aloysius Gonzaga
Journal:  Pan Afr Med J       Date:  2010-09-02

Review 9.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-04

10.  Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: randomised screening trial.

Authors:  Anthony B Miller; Claus Wall; Cornelia J Baines; Ping Sun; Teresa To; Steven A Narod
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2014-02-11
View more
  2 in total

1.  The Impact of Education on Knowledge Attitude and Practice of Breast Self-Examination Among Adolescents Girls at the Fiwasaye Girls Grammar School Akure, Nigeria.

Authors:  Olabisi Fatimo Ibitoye; Gloria Thupayegale-Tshwenegae
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Assessment of breast self- examination practice and associated factors among female workers in Debre Tabor Town public health facilities, North West Ethiopia, 2018: Cross- sectional study.

Authors:  Asrat Hailu Dagne; Alemu Degu Ayele; Ephrem Mengesha Assefa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.