HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pisano, E. D. Articles by Holliday, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pisano, E. D. Articles by Holliday, J. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Has the Mammography Quality Standards Act Affected the Mammography Quality in North Carolina?

¹ Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina, CB#7510, 503 Old Infirmary, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7510.
² Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center 237, University of North Carolina, CB#7295, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7295.
³ Department of Environment and Natural Resources, North Carolina Department of Radiation Protection, 3825 Barrett Dr., Raleigh, NC 27609-7221.
⁴ Department of Radiologic Sciences, University of North Carolina School of Medical Wing E22, CB 7130, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7130.
⁵ North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Community Health, 1330 St. Mary's St., P. O. Box 29605, Raleigh, NC 27626-0605.

OBJECTIVE. The United States Food and Drug Administration implemented federal regulations governing mammography under the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) of 1992. During 1995, its first year in implementation, we examined the impact of the MQSA on the quality of mammography in North Carolina.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. All mammography facilities were inspected during 1993-1994, and again in 1995. Both inspections evaluated mean glandular radiation dose, phantom image evaluation, darkroom fog, and developer temperature. Two mammography health specialists employed by the North Carolina Division of Radiation Protection performed all inspections and collected and codified data.

RESULTS. The percentage of facilities that met quality standards increased from the first inspection to the second inspection. Phantom scores passing rate was 31.6% versus 78.2%; darkroom fog passing rate was 74.3% versus 88.5%; and temperature difference passing rate was 62.4% versus 86.9%.

CONCLUSION. In 1995, the first year that the MQSA was in effect, there was a significant improvement in the quality of mammography in North Carolina. This improvement probably resulted from facilities' compliance with federal regulations.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K.-H. Ng, N. Jamal, and L. DeWerd Global quality control perspective for the physical and technical aspects of screen-film mammography--image quality and radiation dose Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2006; 121(4): 445 - 451. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. H. Taplin, C. M. Rutter, and C. D. Lehman Testing the effect of computer-assisted detection on interpretive performance in screening mammography. Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2006; 187(6): 1475 - 1482. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Baker and M. S. Soo Breast US: Assessment of Technical Quality and Image Interpretation Radiology, April 1, 2002; 223(1): 229 - 238. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]