Structured reporting of x-ray mammography in the first diagnosis of breast cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal

• Published in: Radiologia medica 2022-05, Vol.127 (5), p.471-483
• Main Authors: Neri, Emanuele, Granata, Vincenza, Montemezzi, Stefania, Belli, Paolo, Bernardi, Daniela, Brancato, Beniamino, Caumo, Francesca, Calabrese, Massimo, Coppola, Francesca, Cossu, Elsa, Faggioni, Lorenzo, Frigerio, Alfonso, Fusco, Roberta, Petrillo, Antonella, Girardi, Veronica, Iacconi, Chiara, Marini, Carolina, Marino, Maria Adele, Martincich, Laura, Nori, Jacopo, Pediconi, Federica, Saguatti, Gianni, Sansone, Mario, Sardanelli, Francesco, Scaperrotta, Gianfranco Paride, Zuiani, Chiara, Ciaghi, Eleonora, Montella, Marco, Miele, Vittorio, Grassi, Roberto
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Breast cancer; Breast Radiology; Correlation coefficients; Diagnostic Radiology; Imaging; Interventional Radiology; Mammography; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neuroradiology; Quality assessment; Radiation dosage; Radiology; Ultrasound
• ISSN: 1826-6983; 0033-8362; 1826-6983
• DOI: 10.1007/s11547-022-01478-5

Background Radiology is an essential tool in the management of a patient. The aim of this manuscript was to build structured report (SR) Mammography based in Breast Cancer. Methods A working team of 16 experts (group A) was composed to create a SR for Mammography Breast Cancer. A further working group of 4 experts (group B), blinded to the activities of the group A, was composed to assess the quality and clinical usefulness of the SR final draft. Modified Delphi process was used to assess level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. Results The final SR version was built by including n  = 2 items in Personal Data, n  = 4 items in Setting, n  = 2 items in Comparison with previous breast examination, n  = 19 items in Anamnesis and clinical context; n  = 10 items in Technique; n  = 1 item in Radiation dose; n  = 5 items Parenchymal pattern; n  = 28 items in Description of the finding; n  = 12 items in Diagnostic categories and Report and n  = 1 item in Conclusions. The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 and 807 in the second round. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.82 in the second round. About the quality evaluation, the overall mean score of the experts was 3.3. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.90. Conclusions Structured reporting improves the quality, clarity and reproducibility of reports across departments, cities, countries and internationally and will assist patient management and improve breast health care and facilitate research.