scholarly journals Does individual programme size affect screening performance? Results from the United Kingdom NHS breast screening programme

2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.G. Blanks ◽  
R.L. Bennett ◽  
M.G. Wallis ◽  
S.M. Moss
1997 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Gerard ◽  
Jackie Brown ◽  
Kathy Johnston

Objective— To compare the UK breast screening programme with the Forrest Report recommendations of 1986. Setting— The UK breast screening programme. Methods— A postal survey of 97 local breast screening programmes in the United Kingdom. The main outcome measures were the frequency of screening, the use of two view screening on incident screens, reading of screening mammograms, assessment procedures and visits, staffing levels, and the use of building and equipment. Results— Eighty two (85%) of the questionnaires were completed and returned. All programmes screen every three years, as Forrest intended, with the exception of one health region which screens more often. The national policy is to use two views on incident screens where there is a clinical indication. None the less, 14% of programmes are using, or intending to use, two views on all women. Double reading of mammograms is not recommended in the United Kingdom outside Scotland, but is used by 88% of programmes. All programmes have access to the equipment required for the assessment techniques recommended by Forrest. Variation exists between programmes in the procedures women can expect to receive at their initial assessment visit and in the total number of assessment visits. Sixty eight per cent of programmes' breast screening budgets cover the staff required for a multidisciplinary team as denned by the Forrest Report. Ninety three per cent of screening programmes are organised around static sites, with 86% of these also using mobile vans. Conclusions— The national programme is following recommendations about the frequency of screening, but there seems to be some divergence from policy as regards the use of double reading, two views at incident screening, and the multidisciplinary team covered by the programmes' breast screening budget. Further research is needed on the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of two view incidence screening, double reading, and non-radiologists as readers. Investigation is also needed of the costs and effects of the variation between programmes in the number of assessment visits a woman may have.


1998 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 146-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
G J Ong ◽  
J Austoker ◽  
M Michell

Objective In the United Kingdom in 1994–95 about 16 500 women aged 50 to 64 were asked to come back earlier than the usual three yearly screening interval for further mammography (early rescreen (ES)) or for a range of further investigations at an assessment centre (early recall (ER)). This study aimed at providing epidemiological data on ES/ER, in particular, how often and why it is used, and what the outcome is of using it. Setting National Health Service breast screening programme in the United Kingdom. Methods All breast screening units were invited to complete a postal questionnaire. Two reminders were sent. The units were asked retrospectively to provide breast screening data about women aged 50 to 64 from their local computer systems. Women placed on ES/ER were followed up for at least one year. Results The response rate was 71% (69/97), of which 14% (10/69) were unable to provide the required data, leaving 59 completed questionnaires (61%). The rate of placing women on ES/ER was above 1.0% for 26/54 (48%) responding breast screening units and above 2.0% for 13/54 (24%) units. Women were placed on ES/ER because of ( a) previous breast cancer (21% of cases; cancer detection rate 2.4%), ( b) diagnostic uncertainty (51%; cancer detection rate 3.0%), or ( c) family history (27%; cancer detection rate 0.6%). Breast screening units with a high rate of placing women on ER were significantly more likely to have a high recall rate ( rS=0.63; n=53; p<0.0005) or a high benign surgical biopsy rate ( rS=0.33; n=49; p<0.05), or both. The cancer detection rate of ES/ER tended to decrease with increasing ES/ER rates ( rS=−0.37; n=51; p<0.01). Conclusions A relatively large number of women were placed on ES or ER for a range of reasons. If the recommendations given are followed, the number of women placed on ER may be reduced while maintaining the cancer detection rate at the required level. The option of ES should not be used.


1983 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.W.H. Stamp ◽  
G.H. Whitehouse ◽  
I.W. McDicken ◽  
S.J. Leinster ◽  
W.D. George

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document