Literature DB >> 8259406

Current practice of screening mammography in the United States: data from the National Survey of Mammography Facilities.

F Houn1, M L Brown.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the extent to which screening mammography (SCM) has been organized according to the public health concept of low-cost, high-quality, and population-based screening, selected indicators of U.S. mammography facilities were evaluated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Institute's phase I of the National Survey of Mammography Facilities were analyzed. This data base consists of questionnaire information obtained in 1992 from a 10% random sample of U.S. mammography facilities.
RESULTS: Of 1,057 facilities, 634 (60%) distinguished SCM from diagnostic mammography (DXM). In facilities providing SCM (n = 535), 477 (89%) used the mediolateral oblique (MLO) view and/or the craniocaudal (CC) view. While 898 (85%) of all facilities requested clinical follow-up of abnormal mammograms, only 285 (27%) facilities actually received this information. Only 137 (13%) facilities operated at high volume (> or = 15 mammograms per day per machine), and 211 (20%) used batch interpretation. Average cost of a screening mammogram was $89 (range, $10-$225).
CONCLUSIONS: While more facilities are distinguishing SCM from DXM and obtain MLO and CC views, SCM does not appear to be organized for high volume and low cost.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8259406     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.190.1.8259406

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  10 in total

1.  Community-based mammography practice: services, charges, and interpretation methods.

Authors:  R Edward Hendrick; Gary R Cutter; Eric A Berns; Connie Nakano; Joseph Egger; Patricia A Carney; Linn Abraham; Stephen H Taplin; Carl J D'Orsi; William Barlow; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  The impact of mammography quality improvement legislation in Michigan: implications for the National Mammography Quality Standards Act.

Authors:  L Fintor; M Brown; R Fischer; O Suleiman; C Garlinghouse; J Camburn; E Frazier; F Houn
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Factors associated with women's adherence to mammography screening guidelines.

Authors:  K A Phillips; K Kerlikowske; L C Baker; S W Chang; M L Brown
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 5.  Breast cancer control among the underserved--an overview.

Authors:  N Breen; L G Kessler; M L Brown
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Comparing screening mammography for early breast cancer detection in Vermont and Norway.

Authors:  Solveig Hofvind; Pamela M Vacek; Joan Skelly; Donald L Weaver; Berta M Geller
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Reduced bone mineral density is associated with breast arterial calcification.

Authors:  Jhansi Reddy; John P Bilezikian; Suzanne J Smith; Lori Mosca
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2007-10-30       Impact factor: 5.958

8.  Are increases in mammographic screening still a valid explanation for trends in breast cancer incidence in the United States?

Authors:  L M Wun; E J Feuer; B A Miller
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  Bone Density in Postmenopausal Women with or without Breast Arterial Calcification.

Authors:  Atoosa Adibi; Farnaz Rabani; Silva Hovsepian
Journal:  Adv Biomed Res       Date:  2017-03-28

10.  The influence of breast density and key demographics of radiographers on mammography reporting performance - a pilot study.

Authors:  Maram Alakhras; Dana S Al-Mousa; Alaa K Alqadi; Haneen A Sabaneh; Ruba M Karasneh; Kelly M Spuur
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2021-05-24
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.