Comparison of technical parameters and women's experience between self-compression and standard compression modes in mammography screening: a single-blind randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the compression force, breast thickness, and glandular dose, as well as the severity of discomfort and women's experience between the patient-assisted compression (PAC) and standard compression (SC) modes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study at Hospital del Mar in Barcelona, Spain. We included 448 asymptomatic women aged 50 to 69 years old, attending their screening round from December 2017 to December 2019. Mammograms included the two bilateral views. In each woman, one breast was studied with SC and the other with PAC. The mode used in each breast was selected following a randomized list. Compression force, breast thickness, and average glandular dose were obtained for each of the 1792 images. We also recorded the degree of discomfort and women's experience, after mammogram acquisitions, using a predefined survey. RESULTS: Higher compression forces were obtained with PAC than with SC (99.27 N vs 83.25 N, p < 0.001). Breast thickness mode (56.11 mm vs 57.52 mm, p = 0.015) and glandular dose (1.34 mGy vs 1.37 mGy, p = 0.018) were lower in PAC. The discomfort score was slightly higher with PAC (mean 3.94 vs 3.69, p = 0.042), but in the satisfaction survey, more women reported that PAC caused less discomfort. Additionally, 63.2% of women (289/448) preferred PAC. CONCLUSION: PAC achieved higher compression forces without impairing the other technical imaging parameters and enhanced women's experience of screening mammography. We believe there were no clinically significant differences in the severity of discomfort between the two modes. KEY POINTS: • Self-compression allows higher compression forces than the standard compression mode. • Self-compression does not affect technical imaging parameters. • Self-compression improved women's experience of screening mammography when standard compression was used on one breast and self-compression on the other.

Does the patient-assisted compression mode affect the mammography quality? A within-woman randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the image quality of a mammography screening device using the patient-assisted compression (PAC) compared with the standard compression (SC) mode. METHODS: This prospective within-woman, randomized controlled trial was conducted between September 2017 and December 2019. Participants were asymptomatic women aged 50 to 69 years attending their second or subsequent screening mammography round. By random assignment, one breast underwent the SC and the other breast, the PAC. Image quality was evaluated as perfect, good, moderate, or inadequate (PGMI) on 10 criteria for the craniocaudal (CC) view and 8 criteria for the mediolateral oblique (MLO) view. Pearson's chi-square test, with Yates' correction if pertinent, was performed to compare image quality between compression modes. RESULTS: A total of 444 participants were included (mean [± standard deviation] age, 60 [± 4.9] years). There were no differences in the percentages of PGMI between the PAC and SC modes for the CC view (perfect, 37% [162/444] vs 37% [163/444]; good, 1% [5/444] vs 2% [9/444]; moderate, 62% [277/444] vs 61% [271/444]; inadequate, 0% vs 0.2% [1/444]; p = .88) or for the MLO view (perfect, 53% [237/444] vs 56% [247/444]; good, 22% [99/444] vs 22% [97/444]; moderate, 23% [102/444] vs 22% [98/444]; inadequate, 1% [6/444] vs 0.5% [2/444]; p = .72). No differences were found when we stratified by laterality or when analyzed by PGMI criteria. CONCLUSION: PAC does not seem to impair mammographic image quality. Future research should focus in a daily practice setting. KEY POINTS: No differences were found in the distribution of the PGMI classification, a tool for quality assessment, between patient-assisted compression and standard compression. Similar results were found on stratification of image quality by mammographic view and breast laterality for both types of compression. None of the PGMI criteria had significantly more errors in patient-assisted compression than in standard compression.