Value of BI-RADS 3 Audits
dc.contributor.author | Roychowdhury, Prithwijit | |
dc.contributor.author | Vijayaraghavan, Gopal | |
dc.contributor.author | Roubil, John G. | |
dc.contributor.author | Williams, Imani M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Siddiqui, Efaza | |
dc.contributor.author | Vedantham, Srinivasan | |
dc.date | 2022-08-11T08:10:50.000 | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-08-23T17:21:56Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-08-23T17:21:56Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-02-14 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2022-07-15 | |
dc.identifier.citation | <p>Roychowdhury P, Vijayaraghavan GR, Roubil J, Williams IM, Siddiqui E, Vedantham S. Value of BI-RADS 3 Audits. Biomed J Sci Tech Res. 2022 Feb;41(5):33086-33092. doi: 10.26717/BJSTR.2022.41.006668. Epub 2022 Feb 14. PMID: 35392255; PMCID: PMC8983005. <a href="https://doi.org/10.26717/BJSTR.2022.41.006668">Link to article on publisher's site</a></p> | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2574-1241 (Linking) | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.26717/BJSTR.2022.41.006668 | |
dc.identifier.pmid | 35392255 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/48637 | |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: BI-RADS 3 is an established assessment category in which the probability of malignancy is equal to or less than 2%. However, monitoring adherence to imaging criteria can be challenging and there are few established benchmarks for auditing BI-RADS 3 assignments. In this study, we explore some parameters that could serve as useful tools for quality control and clinical practice management. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study covered a 4-year period (Jan 2014-Dec 2017) and included all women over 40 years who were recalled from a screening exam and had an initial assignment of BI-RADS 3 (probably benign) category after diagnostic workup. A follow-up period of 2 years following the assignment of BI-RADS 3 was used for quantitative quality control metrics. Results: Among 135,765 screening exams, 13,453 were recalled and 1,037 BI-RADS 3 cases met inclusion criteria. The follow-up rate at 24 months was 86.7%. The upgrade rate was 7.4% (77/1,037) [CI: 5.9-9.2%] and the PPV3 was 33.8% (26/77) [CI: 23.4-45.5%]. The cancer yield was 2.51% (26/1,037) [CI: 1.64-3.65%] and did not differ (p=0. 243) from the 2% probability of malignancy. The initial BI-RADS3 per screening exam and per recall from screening were 0.76% (1,037/135,765) [CI: 0.72-0.81%] and 7.7% (1,037/13,453) [CI: 7.26-8.17%], respectively. Conclusion: Regular audit of BIRADS 3 metrics has the potential to provide additional insights for clinical practice management. Data from varied clinical settings with input from an expert committee could help establish benchmarks for these metrics. | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.relation | <p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=35392255&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p> | |
dc.rights | Copyright @ Srinivasan Vedantham. This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. | |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | |
dc.subject | BI-RADS 3 | |
dc.subject | BI-RADS criteria | |
dc.subject | breast cancer | |
dc.subject | mammography | |
dc.subject | radiology | |
dc.subject | screening | |
dc.subject | Diagnosis | |
dc.subject | Health Services Administration | |
dc.subject | Health Services Research | |
dc.subject | Neoplasms | |
dc.subject | Radiology | |
dc.subject | Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases | |
dc.subject | Women's Health | |
dc.title | Value of BI-RADS 3 Audits | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
dc.source.journaltitle | Biomedical journal of scientific and technical research | |
dc.source.volume | 41 | |
dc.source.issue | 5 | |
dc.identifier.legacyfulltext | https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1717&context=radiology_pubs&unstamped=1 | |
dc.identifier.legacycoverpage | https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/radiology_pubs/700 | |
dc.identifier.contextkey | 30234288 | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2022-08-23T17:21:56Z | |
html.description.abstract | <p>Objectives: BI-RADS 3 is an established assessment category in which the probability of malignancy is equal to or less than 2%. However, monitoring adherence to imaging criteria can be challenging and there are few established benchmarks for auditing BI-RADS 3 assignments. In this study, we explore some parameters that could serve as useful tools for quality control and clinical practice management.</p> <p>Materials and Methods: This retrospective study covered a 4-year period (Jan 2014-Dec 2017) and included all women over 40 years who were recalled from a screening exam and had an initial assignment of BI-RADS 3 (probably benign) category after diagnostic workup. A follow-up period of 2 years following the assignment of BI-RADS 3 was used for quantitative quality control metrics.</p> <p>Results: Among 135,765 screening exams, 13,453 were recalled and 1,037 BI-RADS 3 cases met inclusion criteria. The follow-up rate at 24 months was 86.7%. The upgrade rate was 7.4% (77/1,037) [CI: 5.9-9.2%] and the PPV3 was 33.8% (26/77) [CI: 23.4-45.5%]. The cancer yield was 2.51% (26/1,037) [CI: 1.64-3.65%] and did not differ (p=0. 243) from the 2% probability of malignancy. The initial BI-RADS3 per screening exam and per recall from screening were 0.76% (1,037/135,765) [CI: 0.72-0.81%] and 7.7% (1,037/13,453) [CI: 7.26-8.17%], respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion: Regular audit of BIRADS 3 metrics has the potential to provide additional insights for clinical practice management. Data from varied clinical settings with input from an expert committee could help establish benchmarks for these metrics.</p> | |
dc.identifier.submissionpath | radiology_pubs/700 | |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Radiology | |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Medicine | |
dc.contributor.department | School of Medicine | |
dc.source.pages | 33086-33092 |