Literature DB >> 31620677

A New Technical Mode in Mammography: Self-Compression Improves Satisfaction.

Sıla Ulus1, Özge Kovan2, Aydan Arslan1, Pınar Elpen2, Erkin Arıbal1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the mammography experience of patients using a manually controlled self- compression tool compared to their previous experience based on technician performed breast compression by a questionnaire survey study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey studies of 365 patients who underwent screening or diagnostic mammography between April 2017 and July 2017 at our center were reviewed retrospectively. Each patient had completed a 12-item questionnaire following mammography examinations. Women who never had a mammography before or who had a previous mammography examination more than 2 years ago or who did not want to use the self-compression device were excluded from the study. 106 women were included in the study.
RESULTS: Patient satisfaction was high. Regarding the comparison of the experience of the exam to previous ones, 70.8% said it was a better experience. The examination was found comfortable by 85.4% of the participants and 75.5% found the examination more comfortable compared to previous ones. Only 11.3% were anxious and 52.8% declared they were less anxious compared to previous examinations. Regarding the attractiveness of the new design, 66.9% declared they found the new design attractive, 39.7% found it more attractive than previous examinations, and 27.3% said the new design decreased anxiety. In the evaluation of impact of patient-assisted compression (PAC) on comfort, 80.2% said that they found it more comfortable and 64.2% said that PAC decreased anxiety. Furthermore, 72.6% said the exam was shorter.
CONCLUSION: Self-compression technique decreases pain and anxiety of women during mammography examinations and promises to enhance compliance of clients and patients with follow-up mammography recommendations.
Copyright © 2019 Turkish Federation of Breast Diseases Associations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mammography; pain; patient satisfaction; self-compression

Year:  2019        PMID: 31620677      PMCID: PMC6776132          DOI: 10.5152/ejbh.2019.4480

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Breast Health


  17 in total

1.  Pain experienced by women attending breast cancer screening.

Authors:  M E Keemers-Gels; R P Groenendijk; J H van den Heuvel; C Boetes; P G Peer; T H Wobbes
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Mammography-related anxiety: effect of preprocedural patient education.

Authors:  M B Mainiero; B Schepps; N C Clements; C E Bird
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr

3.  Premedication to reduce discomfort during screening mammography.

Authors:  Colleen K Lambertz; Christopher J Johnson; Paul G Montgomery; James R Maxwell
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-07-22       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Study of socio-economic characteristics, diagnosis and outcome of women participating or not participating in mammogram screening.

Authors:  M Padoan; D Ferrante; G Pretti; C Magnani
Journal:  Ann Ig       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec

5.  Insights from the breast cancer screening trials: how screening affects the natural history of breast cancer and implications for evaluating service screening programs.

Authors:  László Tabár; Amy Ming-Fang Yen; Wendy Yi-Ying Wu; Sam Li-Sheng Chen; Sherry Yueh-Hsia Chiu; Jean Ching-Yuan Fann; May Mei-Sheng Ku; Robert A Smith; Stephen W Duffy; Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.431

6.  Clinical assessment of a radiolucent cushion for mammography.

Authors:  L Tabar; G S Lebovic; G D Hermann; C S Kaufman; C Alexander; J Sayre
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 1.990

Review 7.  European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition--summary document.

Authors:  N Perry; M Broeders; C de Wolf; S Törnberg; R Holland; L von Karsa
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2007-11-17       Impact factor: 32.976

8.  Impact of patient-controlled compression on the mammography experience.

Authors:  P J Kornguth; B K Rimer; M R Conaway; D C Sullivan; K E Catoe; A L Stout; J S Brackett
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Effective radiation attenuation calibration for breast density: compression thickness influences and correction.

Authors:  John J Heine; Ke Cao; Jerry A Thomas
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 2.819

10.  Patient comfort from the technologist perspective: factors to consider in mammographic imaging.

Authors:  Christina C Mendat; Dave Mislan; Lisa Hession-Kunz
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2017-05-18
View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparison of technical parameters and women's experience between self-compression and standard compression modes in mammography screening: a single-blind randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Natalia Arenas; Rodrigo Alcantara; Margarita Posso; Javier Louro; Daniela Perez-Leon; Belén Ejarque; Mónica Arranz; Jose Maiques; Xavier Castells; Francesc Macià; Marta Román; Ana Rodríguez-Arana
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 5.315

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.