Literature DB >> 32771493

Trends in Attaining Mammography Quality Benchmarks With Repeated Participation in a Quality Measurement Program: Going Beyond the Mammography Quality Standards Act to Address Breast Cancer Disparities.

Garth H Rauscher1, Katherine Tossas-Milligan2, Teresita Macarol3, Paula M Grabler4, Anne Marie Murphy5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The Mammography Quality Standards Act requires that mammography facilities conduct audits, but there are no specifications on the metrics to be measured. In a previous mammography quality improvement project, the authors examined whether breast cancer screening facilities could collect the data necessary to show that they met certain quality benchmarks. Here the authors present trends from the first 5 years of data collection to examine whether continued participation in this quality improvement program was associated with an increase in the number of benchmarks met for breast cancer screening.
METHODS: Participating facilities across the state of Illinois (n = 114) with at least two time points of data collected (2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, and/or 2013) were included. Facilities provided aggregate data on screening mammographic examinations and corresponding diagnostic follow-up information, which was used to estimate 13 measures and corresponding benchmarks for patient tracking, callback, cancer detection, loss to follow-up, and timeliness of care.
RESULTS: The number of facilities able to show that they met specific benchmarks increased with length of participation for many but not all measures. Trends toward meeting more benchmarks were apparent for cancer detection, timely imaging, not lost at biopsy, known minimal status (P < .01 for all), and proportion of screening-detected cancers that were minimal and early stage (P < .001 for both).
CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the quality improvement program seemed to lead to improvements in patient tracking, callback and detection, and timeliness benchmarks.
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast Cancer; Mammography; Mammography Quality Standards Act; Quality Improvement

Year:  2020        PMID: 32771493      PMCID: PMC8035910          DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.07.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  7 in total

1.  Performance benchmarks for screening mammography.

Authors:  Robert D Rosenberg; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Linn A Abraham; Edward A Sickles; Constance D Lehman; Berta M Geller; Patricia A Carney; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S M Buist; Donald L Weaver; William E Barlow; Rachel Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The black:white disparity in breast cancer mortality: the example of Chicago.

Authors:  Jocelyn Hirschman; Steven Whitman; David Ansell
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 2.506

3.  Improving Mammography Quality Through EQUIP.

Authors:  Kathryn Faguy
Journal:  Radiol Technol       Date:  2019-03

4.  Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography.

Authors:  Edward A Sickles; Diana L Miglioretti; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Berta M Geller; Jessica W T Leung; Robert D Rosenberg; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Bonnie C Yankaskas
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Screening Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Robert F Arao; Brian L Sprague; Janie M Lee; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Louise M Henderson; Tracy Onega; Anna N A Tosteson; Garth H Rauscher; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Beyond the mammography quality standards act: measuring the quality of breast cancer screening programs.

Authors:  Garth H Rauscher; Anne Marie Murphy; Jennifer M Orsi; Danielle M Dupuy; Paula M Grabler; Christine B Weldon
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  A community effort to reduce the black/white breast cancer mortality disparity in Chicago.

Authors:  David Ansell; Paula Grabler; Steven Whitman; Carol Ferrans; Jacqueline Burgess-Bishop; Linda Rae Murray; Ruta Rao; Elizabeth Marcus
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 2.506

  7 in total
  1 in total

1.  Test Sets and Real-Life Performance: Can One Predict the Other?

Authors:  Denise Thigpen; Jocelyn Rapelyea
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2020-09-25
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.