Radiologists' attitudes and use of mammography audit reports.
OBJECTIVE
The US Mammography Quality Standards Act mandates medical audits to track breast cancer outcomes data associated with interpretive performance. The objectives of our study were to assess the content and style of audits and examine use of, attitudes toward, and perceptions of the value that radiologists' have regarding mandated medical audits.


METHODS
Radiologists (n = 364) at mammography registries in seven US states contributing data to the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) were invited to participate. We examined radiologists' demographic characteristics, clinical experience, use, attitudes, and perceived value of audit reports from results of a self-administered survey. Information on the content and style of BCSC audits provided to radiologists and facilities was obtained from site investigators. Radiologists' characteristics were analyzed according to whether or not they self-reported receiving regular mammography audit reports. Latent class analysis was used to classify radiologists' individual perceptions of audit reports into overall probabilities of having "favorable," "less favorable," "neutral," or "unfavorable" attitudes toward audit reports.


RESULTS
Seventy-one percent (257 of 364) of radiologists completed the survey; two radiologists did not complete the audit survey question, leaving 255 for the final study cohort. Most survey respondents received regular audits (91%), paid close attention to their audit numbers (83%), found the reports valuable (87%), and felt that audit reports prompted them to improve interpretative performance (75%). Variability was noted in the style, target audience, and frequency of reports provided by the BCSC registries. One in four radiologists reported that if Congress mandates more intensive auditing requirements, but does not provide funding to support this regulation they may stop interpreting mammograms.


CONCLUSIONS
Radiologists working in breast imaging generally had favorable opinions of audit reports, which were mandated by Congress; however, almost 1 in 10 radiologists reported that they did not receive audits.
Elmore
Joann G
JG
Division of General Internal Medicine, 325 Ninth Avenue, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98104, USA.
Aiello Bowles
Erin J
EJ
Geller
Berta
B
Oster
Natalia Vukshich
NV
Carney
Patricia A
PA
Miglioretti
Diana L
DL
Buist
Diana S M
DS
Kerlikowske
Karla
K
Sickles
Edward A
EA
Onega
Tracy
T
Rosenberg
Robert D
RD
Yankaskas
Bonnie C
BC
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000453:epidemiology*; D054869:Clinical Audit / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008327:Mammography / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D010820:Physicians / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011871:Radiology / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D014481:United States / Q000453:epidemiology
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(1 Suppl):S195-9
18406927
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Feb;192(2):327-33
19155390
Breast Dis. 2001;13:97-107
15687627
Radiology. 1989 Apr;171(1):91-3
2928551
Am J Epidemiol. 2000 Aug 15;152(4):371-8
10968382
Semin Roentgenol. 2007 Oct;42(4):211-7
17919523
Ann Intern Med. 2003 Feb 4;138(3):168-75
12558355
Adm Radiol. 1995 Mar;14(3):29-31
10142158
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995 Jul;165(1):19-25
7785586
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Jul;193(1):157-64
19542408
Radiol Manage. 1996 Jan-Feb;18(1):40-6
10154334
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997 Oct;169(4):1001-8
9308451
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Dec 19;99(24):1854-63
18073379
Radiology. 2009 Dec;253(3):641-51
19864507
Radiol Clin North Am. 2000 Jul;38(4):759-72
10943276
Radiology. 2009 Dec;253(3):632-40
19789234
Radiol Clin North Am. 1992 Jan;30(1):265-75
1732933
J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Oct;50(10):1129-36
9368521
Struct Equ Modeling. 2007;14(4):671-694
19953201
Radiology. 2007 May;243(2):360-7
17456866
Perm J. 2004 Spring;8(2):12-8
26704912