Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bassett, L. W.
Right arrow Articles by Chen, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bassett, L. W.
Right arrow Articles by Chen, L.

Radiology, Vol 194, 189-192, Copyright © 1995 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Effects of a program to train radiologic technologists to identify abnormalities on mammograms

LW Bassett, AJ Hollatz-Brown, R Bastani, JG Pearce, K Hirji and L Chen
Iris Cantor Center for Breast Imaging, Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center 90024- 6952.

PURPOSE: To assess whether radiologic technologists could be successfully trained to identify abnormalities on mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight radiologic technologists from two different institutions took a pretest, underwent an 8-hour training course followed by a period of preceptorship, and then took a posttest. Seven radiologists also took the pretest and posttest, which consisted of evaluating 1,238 two-view screening examinations, including 318 biopsy- proved cancers. RESULTS: Overall, technologists at institution 1 had lower sensitivity (78%) at the pretest, which improved at the posttest (90%). Technologists at institution 2 had lower specificity at the pretest (44%), which improved on the posttest (64%). Hypothetical pairing of radiologists and technologists with use of posttest results revealed an increase in sensitivity (median increase, 12% at institution 1 and 19% at institution 2). CONCLUSION: Formalized training successfully modified the technologists' skills. Radiologic technologists could be used to increase the number of breast cancers detected at screening mammography.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
L. E. M. Duijm, J. H. Groenewoud, J. Fracheboud, and H. J. de Koning
Additional Double Reading of Screening Mammograms by Radiologic Technologists: Impact on Screening Performance Parameters
J Natl Cancer Inst, August 1, 2007; 99(15): 1162 - 1170.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. H. Sumkin, H. M. Klaman, M. Graham, T. Ruskauff, R. C. Gennari, J. L. King, A. H. Klym, M. A. Ganott, and D. Gur
Prescreening Mammography by Technologists: A Preliminary Assessment
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2003; 180(1): 253 - 256.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. M. Friedenberg
The Role of the Supertechnologist
Radiology, June 1, 2000; 215(3): 630 - 633.
[Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
J. M. Tonita, J. P. Hillis, and C.-H. Lim
Medical Radiologic Technologist Review: Effects on a Population-based Breast Cancer Screening Program
Radiology, May 1, 1999; 211(2): 529 - 533.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1995 by the Radiological Society of North America.