Trends in Attaining Mammography Quality Benchmarks With Repeated Participation in a Quality Measurement Program: Going Beyond the Mammography Quality Standards Act to Address Breast Cancer Disparities.

PURPOSE: The Mammography Quality Standards Act requires that mammography facilities conduct audits, but there are no specifications on the metrics to be measured. In a previous mammography quality improvement project, the authors examined whether breast cancer screening facilities could collect the data necessary to show that they met certain quality benchmarks. Here the authors present trends from the first 5 years of data collection to examine whether continued participation in this quality improvement program was associated with an increase in the number of benchmarks met for breast cancer screening. METHODS: Participating facilities across the state of Illinois (n = 114) with at least two time points of data collected (2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, and/or 2013) were included. Facilities provided aggregate data on screening mammographic examinations and corresponding diagnostic follow-up information, which was used to estimate 13 measures and corresponding benchmarks for patient tracking, callback, cancer detection, loss to follow-up, and timeliness of care. RESULTS: The number of facilities able to show that they met specific benchmarks increased with length of participation for many but not all measures. Trends toward meeting more benchmarks were apparent for cancer detection, timely imaging, not lost at biopsy, known minimal status (P < .01 for all), and proportion of screening-detected cancers that were minimal and early stage (P < .001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the quality improvement program seemed to lead to improvements in patient tracking, callback and detection, and timeliness benchmarks.

Beyond the mammography quality standards act: measuring the quality of breast cancer screening programs.

OBJECTIVE: A high-quality screening mammography program should find breast cancer when it exists and when the lesion is small and ensure that suspicious findings receive prompt follow-up. The Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) guidelines related to tracking outcomes are insufficient for assessing quality of care. We used data from a quality improvement project to determine whether screening mammography facilities could show that they met certain quality benchmarks beyond those required by MQSA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participating facilities provided aggregate data on screening mammography examinations performed in calendar year 2009 and corresponding diagnostic follow-up, including patients lost to follow-up, timing of diagnostic imaging and biopsy, cancer detection rates, and the proportion of cases of cancer detected as minimal and early-stage tumors. RESULTS: Among the 52 participating institutions, the percentage of institutions meeting each benchmark varied from 27% to 83%. Facilities with American College of Surgeons or National Consortium of Breast Centers designation were more likely to meet benchmarks pertaining to cancer detection and early detection, and disproportionate share facilities were less likely to meet benchmarks pertaining to timeliness of care. CONCLUSION: The results suggest a combination of quality of care issues and incomplete tracking of patients. To accurately measure the quality of the breast cancer screening process, it is critical that there be complete tracking of patients with abnormal screening mammography findings so that results can be interpreted solely in terms of quality of care. The MQSA guidelines for tracking outcomes and measuring quality indicators should be strengthened for better assessment of quality of care.