Evaluation of equipment performance, patient dose, imaging quality, and diagnostic coincidence in five Mexico City mammography services

被引:17
作者
Brandan, ME
Ruiz-Trejo, C
Verdejo-Silva, M
Guevara, M
Lozano-Zalce, H
Madero-Preciado, L
Martín, J
Noel-Etienne, LM
Ramírez-Arias, JL
Soto, J
Villaseñor, Y
机构
[1] Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Inst Fis, Dept Fis Expt, Mexico City 01000, DF, Mexico
[2] Secretaria Salud SSA, Direcc Riesgo Radiol, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
[3] Hosp Gen Mexico City, Dept Radiol & Imagen, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
[4] Hosp Angeles Lomas, Dept Radiol & Imagen, Edo Mexico, Mexico
[5] Inst Mexicano Seguro Social, Ctr Med Nacl Siglo 21, Hosp Oncol, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
[6] Hosp Angeles Pedregal, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
[7] SA CV, Unidad Radiodiagnost, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
[8] Inst Nacl Cancerol, Dept Radiodiagnost, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
关键词
mammography; evaluation; equipment performance; dose; image quality; diagnostic coincidence;
D O I
10.1016/j.arcmed.2003.06.008
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background. Regulations concerning the use of x-rays in medical diagnoses were published in Mexico in 1997. In this work, we evaluate technical aspects of mammography services in the Mexico City area and radiation dose and coincidence between the radiological interpretation by the institution radiologist and by a panel of experts. Methods. Following methodology proposed by the American College of Radiology and the European Community among others, we have evaluated the performance of six mammography systems in Mexico City public and private services. The studied services carry out approximately one half of the mammography studies in the capital's metropolitan area. Results. The systems comply with 53-82% of a total of 31 applied quality control tests and measurements, which include the mammography unit, x-ray generation, collimation, automatic exposure control, compression devices, grid and image receptor, film processing, darkroom, viewboxes, dose, film rejection, and image quality. The elements that most frequently fail are film processing, darkroom, and light boxes; average ACR phantom score is 11.2 (9.5, 12.0); mean average glandular dose measured with the phantom is 1.00 (0.71-1.15) mGy, and measured in patients is 1.75 (0.3, 4.9) mGy; coincidence between radiologic reports (BI-RADS) by the institution radiologist and a panel of experts is obtained in 35% of studied cases. Conclusions. Statistical analysis of results indicated that the level of equipment performance is correlated with image quality, image quality estimated by the panel of radiologists is correlated with phantom score, and coincidence in clinical mammography reports is not correlated with equipment performance and appears to depend on the radiologist's experience. (C) 2004 IMSS. Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:24 / 30
页数:7
相关论文
共 12 条
  • [1] *AM COLL RAD, BREAT IM REP DAT SYS
  • [2] [Anonymous], MAMM QUAL CONTR MAN
  • [3] Brandan ME, 2001, AIP CONF PROC, V593, P71, DOI 10.1063/1.1420468
  • [4] *COMM EUR COMM, 1992, EUR GUID QUAL ASS MA
  • [5] Gray JE, 1983, QUALITY CONTROL DIAG
  • [6] *NAT EL MAN ASS, 1984, NEMA STAND PUBL
  • [7] *SECR HLTH, 1997, NOM158SSA11996 ESP T, P42
  • [8] Sickles EA, 2000, RADIOLOGY, V215, P1
  • [9] Mammography in the 1990s: The United States and Canada
    Suleiman, OH
    Spelic, DC
    McCrohan, JL
    Symonds, GR
    Houn, F
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1999, 210 (02) : 345 - 351
  • [10] VERDEJOSILVA M, 2000, PROGRAMA NACL PROTEC