Litcius/Paper detail

How long does it take to read a mammogram? Investigating the reading time of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography

George Partridge, Iain Darker, Jonathan J. James, Keshthra Satchithananda, Nisha Sharma, Alexandra Valencia, William Teh, Humaira Fayyaz Khan, Elizabeth Muscat, Michael Michell, Yan Chen

2024European Journal of Radiology17 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyse digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) reading times in the screening setting, compared to 2D full-field digital mammography (FFDM), and investigate the impact of reader experience and professional group on interpretation times. METHOD: Reading time data were recorded in the PROSPECTS Trial, a prospective randomised trial comparing DBT plus FFDM or synthetic 2D mammography (S2D) to FFDM alone, in the National Health Service (NHS) breast screening programme, from January 2019-February 2023. Time to read DBT+FFDM or DBT+S2D and FFDM alone was calculated per case and reading times were compared between modalities using dependent T-tests. Reading times were compared between readers from different professional groups (radiologists and radiographer readers) and experience levels using independent T-tests. The learning curve effect of using DBT in screening on reading time was investigated using a Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Forty-eight readers interpreted 1,242 FFDM batches (34,210 FFDM cases) and 973 DBT batches (13,983 DBT cases). DBT reading time was doubled compared to FFDM (2.09 ± 0.64 min vs. 0.98 ± 0.30 min; p < 0.001), and DBT+S2D reading was longer than DBT + FFDM (2.24 ± 0.62 min vs. 2.04 ± 0.46 min; p = 0.006). No difference was identified in reading time between radiologists and radiographers (2.06 ± 0.71 min vs. 2.14 ± 0.46 min, respectively; p = 0.71). Readers with five or more years of experience reading DBT were quicker than those with less experience (1.86 ± 0.56 min vs. 2.37 ± 0.65 min; p = 0.008), and DBT reading time decreased after less than 9 months accrued screening experience (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: DBT reading times were double those of FFDM in the screening setting, but there was a short learning curve effect with readers showing significant improvements in reading times within the first nine months of DBT experience. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT03733106.

Topics & Concepts

Digital Breast TomosynthesisMedicineReading (process)Digital mammographyMammographyTomosynthesisNuclear medicineBreast screeningBreast imagingMedical physicsRadiologyBreast cancerInternal medicineCancerPolitical scienceLawDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingAI in cancer detectionTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation