Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회지)

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Survey on Current Trends of Breast Imaging Practices in Korea

한국의 유방 영상 실무의 현황에 관한 조사

  • Yun, Bo La (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Sun Mi (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jang, Mijung (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Cho, Nariya (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Han, Boo-Kyung (Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
  • 윤보라 (서울대학교 의과대학 분당서울대학교병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 김선미 (서울대학교 의과대학 분당서울대학교병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 장미정 (서울대학교 의과대학 분당서울대학교병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 조나리야 (서울대학교 의과대학 서울대학교병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 한부경 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 영상의학)
  • Received : 2018.05.23
  • Accepted : 2018.12.18
  • Published : 2019.07.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to analyze the current practices of breast imaging among Korean radiologists. Materials and Methods We invited members of the Korean Society of Breast Imaging (KSBI) working as breast radiologists to participate in a survey on the current practices in breast imaging, and investigated how quality assurance (QA), medical audits, and imaging-histologic discordance were conducted. Results The survey involved 312 members of the KSBI, and 116 (37%) responded to the 21 questions in the questionnaire. Most of the respondents were women (87%), aged below 50 years (82.7%), and working at university or tertiary hospitals (68.1%), who had varying levels of experience in breast imaging. Of the 116 respondents, 114 (96.6%) followed the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) to interpret breast imaging. Out of 116, 72 (62.1%) interpreted 20 or more mammograms per day, 84 (72.4%) performed 10-30 breast ultrasound scans per day, and 65 (56%) interpreted fewer than 5 breast MRI scans per day. Among the respondents, 82% performed mammography QA, 76.9% evaluated imaging-histologic correlations, and only 38.9% performed medical audits. Conclusion The institutions and working patterns of breast radiologists were diverse. Although many respondents did not conduct medical audits, most of them followed BI-RADS when interpreting breast imaging, performing QA, and evaluating imaging-histologic correlations.

목적 본 연구는 한국 영상의학과 의사의 유방 영상 실무의 현행을 분석하고자 하였다. 대상과 방법 유방 영상 검사 시행 및 판독현황에 대한 조사를 위하여 유방 영상 판독 전문의로 일하는 한국 유방영상학회 회원을 대상으로 하여 어떻게 품질관리(quality assurance; 이하 QA), 의료 감사 및 영상-병리 학적 불일치를 시행하는지 조사하였다. 결과 설문에 한국 유방영상학회 회원 312명이 참여했으며, 설문지의 21개 질문에 116명(37%)이 응답하였다. 응답자의 대부분은 여성(87%), 50세 미만(82.7%), 대학 또는 3차 병원 근무자(68.1%)로 다양한 수준의 유방 영상 판독 경험을 보였다. 유방 영상을 판독할 때 유방 영상 판독 데이터 체계(Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; 이하 BI-RADS)를 따른 응답자는 116명 중 114명(96.6%)이었다. 72명(62.1%)이 유방 촬영술을 하루에 20건 이상 해석하였다. 84명(72.4%)이 하루에 10~30회의 유방 초음파 검사를 실시하였다. 65명(56%)이 하루에 5회 미만의 유방 자기공명영상(MRI) 판독을 하였다. 대부분 응답자(82%)는 유방 촬영의 품질관리를 수행하고 있으며, 76.9%에서 영상-병리 상관 관계를 확인했지만 의료 감사를 수행한 비율은 38.9%에 불과하였다. 결론 유방 영상 전문의들이 일하고 있는 기관과 근무 패턴은 다양하였다. 대부분의 응답자는 유방 영상을 판독할 때 BI-RADS를 따랐고 대부분 QA와 영상-병리 상관 관계 분석을 시행하였으나. 의료 감사는 수행하지 않았다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (No. 2017R1D1A1B03033975).

References

  1. Cancer statistics. Incidence of breat cancer. Available at. http://www.cancer.go.kr/. Published 2014. Accessed Aug 14, 2017
  2. Korean Statistical Information Service. Incidence of breat cancer. Available at. https://kosis.kr/. Published 2016. Accessed Aug 14, 2017
  3. Jung KW, Won YJ, Oh CM, Kong HJ, Lee DH, Lee KH. Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2014. Cancer Res Treat 2017;49:292-305 https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2017.118
  4. Korean Breast Cancer Society. Korean Breast Cancer Society breast cancer facts and figures 2017. Available at. http://www.kbcs.or.kr/sub02/sub04.html/. Accessed Dec 26, 2017
  5. Healthcare Bigdata Hub. Breast MRI frequency 2017. Available at. http://opendata.hira.or.kr/. Accessed Jul 2, 2017
  6. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Physician fee schedule CMS-1654-F. Available at. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/PhysicianFeeSched/PFS-Federal-Regulation-Notices-Items/CMS-1654-F.html?DLPage=1&DLEntries=10&DLSort=2&DLSortDir=descending. Accessed Nov 15, 2016
  7. AAARAD Survey FY16. Association of Administrators in Academic Radiology. Available at. https://wp.aaarad.org/wp/works/journal/. Accessed Dec 26, 2017
  8. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165-175 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2251011667
  9. Park EC. Evaluation of organized cancer screening program in Korea. Available at. http://www.ndsl.kr/ndsl/search/detail/report/reportSearchResultDetail.do?cn=TRKO201100004109. Published 2010. Accessed December 26, 2017
  10. McLelland R, Hendrick RE, Zinninger MD, Wilcox PA. The American College of Radiology mammography accreditation program. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;157:473-479 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.157.3.1872231
  11. Linver MN, Paster SB, Rosenberg RD, Key CR, Stidley CA, King WV. Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases. Radiology 1992;184:39-43 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.184.1.1609100
  12. Sickles EA, Ominsky SH, Sollitto RA, Galvin HB, Monticciolo DL. Medical audit of a rapid-throughput mammography screening practice: methodology and results of 27114 examinations. Radiology 1990;175:323-327 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.175.2.2326455