ObjectivesThis pilot study aimed to characterize and compare radiographers’ mammography practice, including quality control and continuous professional development in five European countries.MethodsOnline survey was performed to collect data regarding participants’ profile, institution’s profile, mammography practice, quality control and continuous professional development. The questionnaire was sent to clinical radiographers working in Estonia, Finland, Norway, Portugal and Switzerland. Descriptive statistical and subgroup analyzes were performed.ResultsThe amount of returned questionnaires was 140. Most respondents were female (92%), having radiography bachelor. The majority (89%) of radiographers was working with full-field digital mammography. The majority (97%) of mammography images were acquired using AEC, and half of the radiographers were using dose saving programmes suggested by the manufacturers. The most typical (50%) compression force ranged from 8 to 11 kg. Part of the radiographers (44%) did not know if their practice followed specific guidelines. The most challenging tasks in mammography identified by radiographers were patient positioning (86%), coping with pain (88%), managing anxiety (83%) and imaging breast implants (71%). The majority (88%) of the respondents undertook continuous professional development activities.ConclusionsThe mammography practice varies across the five countries. We found country-specific traits related to mammography image acquisition, patient-centered care and quality management procedures. The lack of evidence-based knowledge suggests the importance of well-designed studies on these topics. The variability found in this pilot study encourages radiographers to question their own practice and teachers to review and revise the training programmes. Validation in larger studies including more countries is needed.

The short study period allocated to this discipline and lack of material resources were considered the main limitations in mammography education, both impacting on the development of students' skills. Breast positioning, patient communication and quality control were considered key factors affecting mammography performance, patient experience and diagnostic outcome and should therefore be the core focus in mammography education.

Objectives To summarise and compare the performance of magnification mammography and digital zoom utilising a full-field digital mammography (FFDM) system in the detection and diagnosis of microcalcifications. Methods We ran an extended search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Engineering Village and Web of Science. Diagnostic test studies, experimental breast phantom studies and a Monte Carlo phantom study were included. A narrative approach was selected to summarise and compare findings regarding the detection of microcalcifications, while a hierarchical model with bivariate analysis was used for the meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing microcalcifications.Results Nine studies were included. Phantom studies suggested that the size of microcalcifications, magnification or zoom factor, exposure factors and detector technology determine whether digital zoom is equivalent to magnification mammography in the detection of microcalcifications. Pooled sensitivity for magnification and zoom calculated from the diagnostic test studies was 0.93 (95% CI 0.84-0.97) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.70-0.94), respectively. Pooled specificity was 0.55 (95% CI 0.51-0.58) and 0.56 (95% CI 0.50-0.62), respectively. The differences between the sensitivities and specificities were not statistically significant.Conclusions Digital zoom may be equivalent to magnification mammography. Diagnostic test studies and phantom studies using newer detector technology would contribute additional knowledge on this topic. Key Points • The performance of digital zoom is comparable to magnification for detecting microcalcifications when newer detector technology and optimised imaging procedures are utilised. • The accuracy of digital zoom appears equivalent to geometric magnification in diagnosing microcalcifications.

a b s t r a c tObjectives: To identify the roles of health care staff in interprofessional work related to breast cancer detection and diagnosis.Key findings: A comprehensive search was performed using PICO to support inclusion and exclusion criteria. A shortened version of the STROBE checklist ensured evaluation of the studies. 21 included studies resulted in three main categories describing the role of health care professionals; (1) Communicating breast cancer awareness; (2) The Professional's tasks; (3) Efficacy of Interprofessional Teamwork relative to the profession and the individuals. Conclusions: Health care professionals' roles in the breast cancer diagnostic process were described mostly from each professional's viewpoint. Support from leadership and management is needed in order to promote interprofessional work, which will benefit health care professions, professionals, and the patient.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: To produce information about factors related to successful and unsuccessful breast cancer care pathways from the health care staff perspective. Materials and Methods:An electronic qualitative survey was used to collect data simultaneously from hospitals located in four different countries, focusing on four professional groups: diagnostic radiographers; radiation therapists; breast cancer nurses; and biomedical laboratory scientists (n = 23). The hospitals participating in the study treat breast cancer patients and research permits were applied from all of them. Data was analysed by deductive thematic analysis.Results: At the core of a successful breast cancer care pathway is the right content and timely information provided to the patient at the pace the patient is able to adopt. This is especially highlighted at the beginning of the treatment process. In regards to diagnostic services, rigorous execution of mammography, sampling techniques and analyses were seen as important. Staff also valued the importance of aftercare and follow-up, and highlighted the fact that the patient should be given a chance to keep in close contact with care and treatment staff, even after their active treatment process has finished. Conclusion:Health care staff recognized the same success factors for optimal breast cancer care and treatment pathways as patients reported in previous studies, yet more emphasis was put on patient characteristics and the technical performance features of the process. Both patient and staff viewpoints should be taken into account in planning breast cancer care pathways.