Using the Medical Audit to Improve Practice Performance.

Feedback to physicians on their clinical performance is critical to continuous learning and maintenance of skills as well as maintaining patient safety. However, it is fraught with challenges around both implementation and acceptance. Additionally, rewarding of performance improvement is not often done, putting into question the efficacy of the process. Physician audit and feedback have been studied extensively and shown to be beneficial in many fields of medicine. Documenting physician performance and sharing individual and group data have been positively linked to changing physician behavior, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes. Although casual review of one's own performance is often the easiest approach, it is frequently over- or underestimated by self-evaluation. Objective measures are therefore important to provide concrete data on which physicians can act. A fundamental question remains in mammography: Is reporting the information to the physician and accreditation bodies enough, or should there be consequences for the radiologist and/or facility if there is outlier behavior?

Clinically missed cancer: how effectively can radiologists use computer-aided detection?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness with which radiologists can use computer-aided detection (CADe) to detect cancer missed at screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observer study was performed to measure the ability of radiologists to detect breast cancer on mammograms with and without CADe. The images in the study were from 300 analog mammographic examinations. In 234 cases the mammograms were read clinically as normal and free of cancer for at least 2 subsequent years. In the other 66 cases, cancers were missed clinically. In 256 cases, current and previous mammograms were available. Eight radiologists read the dataset and recorded a BI-RADS assessment, the location of the lesion, and their level of confidence that the patient should be recalled for diagnostic workup for each suspicious lesion. Jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis was used. RESULTS: The jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic figure of merit was 0.641 without aid and 0.659 with aid (p = 0.06; 95% CI, -0.001 to 0.036). The sensitivity increased 9.9% (95% CI, 3.4-19%) and the callback rate 12.1% (95% CI, 7.3-20%) with CADe. Both increases were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Radiologists on average ignored 71% of correct computer prompts. CONCLUSION: Use of CADe can increase radiologist sensitivity 10% with a comparable increase in recall rate. There is potential for CADe to have a bigger clinical impact because radiologists failed to recognize a correct computer prompt in 71% of missed cancer cases [corrected].