Back to the list
Congress: ECR25
Poster Number: C-12965
Type: Poster: EPOS Radiologist (scientific)
Authorblock: L. Kregting1, E. Heijnen1, L. B. Van Den Oever1, L. Pennings1, M. Van Oirsouw2, I. Sechopoulos3, M. Broeders1, F. T. Stream Consortium4; 1Nijmegen/NL, 2Utrecht/NL, 3Nijmegen and Enschede/NL, 4-/NL
Disclosures:
Lindy Kregting: Nothing to disclose
Elle Heijnen: Nothing to disclose
Leonardus Bernardus Van Den Oever: Nothing to disclose
Lian Pennings: Nothing to disclose
M Van Oirsouw: Nothing to disclose
Ioannis Sechopoulos: Speaker: Siemens Healthcare, Canon Medical Grant Recipient: Siemens Healthcare, Canon Medical, Screenpoint Medical, Sectra Benelux, Hologic, Volpara Solutions, Lunit Inc, iCAD, E-COM. Advisory Board: Koning Corp.
Mireille Broeders: Speaker: Hologic, Siemens Healthcare. Grant Recipient: Screenpoint Medical, Sectra Benelux, Hologic, Volpara Solutions, Lunit inc,. iCAD.
For The Stream Consortium: Nothing to disclose
Keywords: Breast, Oncology, Professional issues, Mammography, Screening, Workforce
Results

Participants

The survey was completed by 10,983 of the 18,225 participants (60%). In total, 39% reported DBT as not being painful at all (compared to 27% for DM), and 52% only some (compared to 46% for DM). No or some discomfort was experienced by 93% (compared to 76% for DM), and 97% reported no anxiety at all (compared to 88% for DM) (Table 1). The average pain score was 3, which was lower compared to the average score the participants reported for their previous DM (average 3,5) and lower compared to the current DM in the reference group (average 4,3) (Figure 1). In addition, 13% scored their pain with DBT screening at 0, compared to 9% for previous DM and current DM.  Severe pain (score between 7 and 10) was reported by 13% for DBT, 17% for previous DM, and 29% for current DM. About half of the participants (52%) preferred DBT over DM, and 46% had no preference, mainly because they experienced no difference (Table 2). Moreover, 98% had the intention to participate again in future DBT screening.

Table 1: Table 1, Experienced pain, discomfort, and anxiety by screening participants with DBT or DM screening.

Fig 1: Figure 1, Experienced pain on the pain scale by screening participants with DBT and DM screening

Table 2: Table 2, Preferred screening technique by participants, radiographers, and radiologists

Screening radiographers

The survey was completed by 62 of the approximately 100 radiographers (approximately 60%). In total, 84% of them reported DBT as ‘feasible’, and 16% reported DBT as ‘feasible, but sub-optimal’ (Table 3). Among radiographers, 16% preferred DBT over DM, 34% preferred DM, and 50% had no preference. The majority reported working with DBT to be very similar to the current situation with DM. Suggestions for improvements were directed at improving image loading time at the acquisition workstations.

Table 3: Table 3, reported ease of use of DBT screening by radiographers and radiologists

Screening radiologists

The survey was completed by 25 of the 35 radiologists (71%). In total, 16% reported reading DBT in screening to be ‘feasible’, 76% reported it to be ‘feasible, but sub-optimal’, and 8% reported it to be ‘difficult to work with’. Comparing DBT imaging to DM priors was reported ‘feasible’ by 74% of the radiologists, ‘feasible, but sub-optimal’ by 17%, and ‘difficult to work with’ by 9%. Among radiologists, only one radiologist (4%) preferred DBT over DM, 72% preferred DM, and 16% had no preference. Suggestions for improvements were mainly focused on improving loading and reading times.
GALLERY