Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Measuring performance in clinical breast examination

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Wishart, G. C., Warwick, Jane, Pitsinis, V., Duffy, Stephen W. and Britton, P. D. (2010) Measuring performance in clinical breast examination. British Journal of Surgery, Volume 97 (Number 8). pp. 1246-1252. doi:10.1002/bjs.7108

Research output not available from this repository, contact author.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7108

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Background:
Clinical breast examination (CBE) remains an essential part of triple assessment of breast lumps, but to date there are no performance measures for clinicians using this technique. The aim of this retrospective audit was to compare the performance and accuracy of CBE to identify key indicators that could be used to monitor performance prospectively.
Methods:
Clinical examination findings (E1, normal, to E5, malignant) for 16,585 patients who had CBE as part of triple assessment were obtained from electronic medical records. The performance of CBE, by age group, mammographic density and clinician, was assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Results:
There was marked variation in sensitivity between clinicians (range 44.6-65.9 per cent). There was a strong downward trend in the percentage classified as E5 as sensitivity for breast cancer detection decreased, and a corresponding strong downward trend in the proportion of E4 and E5 cancers classified as E5. Both of these measures could be used as indicators to monitor CBE performance.
Conclusion:
The performance measures outlined here could help to identify clinicians who have a lower sensitivity for CBE and who may therefore require feedback and further training.

Item Type: Journal Article
Divisions: Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences > Clinical Trials Unit
Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences
Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Journal or Publication Title: British Journal of Surgery
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
ISSN: 0007-1323
Official Date: August 2010
Dates:
DateEvent
August 2010Published
May 2010Available
Volume: Volume 97
Number: Number 8
Page Range: pp. 1246-1252
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.7108
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Restricted or Subscription Access

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item
twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us