Diagnostic Accuracy of Breast Medical Tactile Examiners (MTEs): A Prospective Pilot Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The usefulness of clinical breast examination (CBE) in general and in breast cancer screening programs has been a matter of debate. This study investigated whether adding vision-impaired medical tactile examiners (MTEs) improves the predictiveness of CBE for suspicious lesions and analyzed the feasibility and acceptability of this approach.Methods
The prospective study included 104 patients. Physicians and MTEs performed CBEs, and mammography and ultrasound results were used as the gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated and logistic regression models were used to compare the predictive value of CBE by physicians alone, MTEs alone, and physicians and MTEs combined.Results
For CBEs by physicians alone, MTEs alone, and both combined, sensitivity was 71, 82, and 89% and specificity was 55, 45, and 35%, respectively. Using adjusted logistic regression models, the validated areas under the curve were 0.685, 0.692, and 0.710 (median bootstrapped p value (DeLong) = 0.381).Conclusion
The predictive value for a suspicious breast lesion in CBEs performed by MTEs in patients without prior surgery was similar to that of physician-conducted CBEs. Including MTEs in the CBE procedure in breast units thus appears feasible and could be a way of utilizing their skills.
SUBMITTER: Lux MP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6465747 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Diagnostic Accuracy of Breast Medical Tactile Examiners (MTEs): A Prospective Pilot Study.
Lux Michael P MP Emons Julius J Bani Mayada R MR Wunderle Marius M Sell Charlotte C Preuss Caroline C Rauh Claudia C Jud Sebastian M SM Heindl Felix F Langemann Hanna H Geyer Thomas T Brandl Anna-Lisa AL Hack Carolin C CC Adler Werner W Schulz-Wendtland Rüdiger R Beckmann Matthias W MW Fasching Peter A PA Gass Paul P
Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) 20190130 1
<h4>Background</h4>The usefulness of clinical breast examination (CBE) in general and in breast cancer screening programs has been a matter of debate. This study investigated whether adding vision-impaired medical tactile examiners (MTEs) improves the predictiveness of CBE for suspicious lesions and analyzed the feasibility and acceptability of this approach.<h4>Methods</h4>The prospective study included 104 patients. Physicians and MTEs performed CBEs, and mammography and ultrasound results wer ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAlthough scabies is estimated to be one of the most common skin conditions globally, prevalence data is not available in most settings. Disease mapping is required to develop and monitor successful control programs. Non-expert health workers are likely to play an important role in scabies mapping activities in endemic settings.MethodologyFour non-expert health workers were trained in the diagnosis of scabies and impetigo. The health worker diagnosis was compared to a reference consensus diagnosis of two doctors experienced in diagnosis. The study was conducted in a primary school in Gizo, Solomon Islands, in August 2018. The six examiners consecutively assessed school students, blinded to each other's findings. Training and diagnostic procedures followed criteria for scabies diagnosis established by the International Alliance for the Control of Scabies in 2018.Principal findingsAmongst the 171 students who underwent clinical assessment the prevalence of scabies and impetigo according to the reference standard was 55% and 45% respectively. Sensitivity of the non-expert health workers' diagnosis compared to the reference standard was 55.3% for scabies (95% confidence interval [CI], 50.1-60.4) with a specificity of 89.9% (95% CI 86-93.1) and 52.6% for impetigo (95% CI 46.9-58.3) with a specificity 97.8% (95% CI 95.7-99). Sensitivity for moderate to severe scabies was 93.5% (95% CI 86.3-97.6) with a specificity of 74% (95% CI 70.2-77.5).ConclusionsFollowing brief training, the diagnostic accuracy of non-expert health workers for scabies and impetigo was promising, especially for moderate to severe disease. Modifications to training and processes are recommended to further improve accuracy. The diagnosis by non-expert health workers may be acceptable for scabies and impetigo mapping in endemic areas.
| S-EPMC6715246 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBringing reliable and accurate tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis closer to patients is a key priority for global TB control. Molbio Diagnostics have developed the Truenat point-of-care molecular assays for detection of TB and rifampicin (RIF) resistance.MethodsWe conducted a prospective multicentre diagnostic accuracy study at 19 primary healthcare centres and seven reference laboratories in Peru, India, Ethiopia and Papua New Guinea to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the point-of-care Truenat MTB, MTB Plus and MTB-RIF Dx assays for pulmonary TB using culture and phenotypic drug susceptibility testing as the reference standard, compared with Xpert MTB/RIF or Ultra.ResultsOf 1807 enrolled participants with TB signs/symptoms, 24% were culture-positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis, of which 15% were RIF-resistant. In microscopy centres, the pooled sensitivity of Truenat MTB and Truenat MTB Plus was 73% (95% CI 67-78%) and 80% (95% CI 75-84%), respectively. Among smear-negative specimens, sensitivities were 36% (95% CI 27-47%) and 47% (95% CI 37-58%), respectively. Sensitivity of Truenat MTB-RIF was 84% (95% CI 62-95%). Truenat assays showed high specificity. Head-to-head comparison in the central reference laboratories suggested that the Truenat assays have similar performance to Xpert MTB/RIF.ConclusionWe found the performance of Molbio's Truenat MTB, MTB Plus and MTB-RIF Dx assays to be comparable to that of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay. Performing the Truenat tests in primary healthcare centres with very limited infrastructure was feasible. These data supported the development of a World Health Organization policy recommendation of the Molbio assays.
| S-EPMC8607906 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) while breathing room air for 5 min (the 'Air-Test') in detecting postoperative atelectasis.DesignProspective cohort study. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed by measuring the agreement between the index test and the reference standard CT scan images.SettingPostanaesthetic care unit in a tertiary hospital in Spain.ParticipantsThree hundred and fifty patients from 12 January to 7 February 2015; 170 patients scheduled for surgery under general anaesthesia who were admitted into the postsurgical unit were included.InterventionThe Air-Test was performed in conscious extubated patients after a 30 min stabilisation period during which they received supplemental oxygen therapy via a venturi mask. The Air-Test was defined as positive when SpO2 was ≤96% and negative when SpO2 was ≥97%. Arterial blood gases were measured in all patients at the end of the Air-Test. In the subsequent 25 min, the presence of atelectasis was evaluated by performing a CT scan in 59 randomly selected patients.Main outcome measuresThe primary study outcome was assessment of the accuracy of the Air-Test for detecting postoperative atelectasis compared with the reference standard. The secondary outcome was the incidence of positive Air-Test results.ResultsThe Air-Test diagnosed postoperative atelectasis with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.98) with a sensitivity of 82.6% and a specificity of 87.8%. The presence of atelectasis was confirmed by CT scans in all patients (30/30) with positive and in 5 patients (17%) with negative Air-Test results. Based on the Air-Test, postoperative atelectasis was present in 36% of the patients (62 out of 170).ConclusionThe Air-Test may represent an accurate, simple, inexpensive and non-invasive method for diagnosing postoperative atelectasis.Trial registrationNCT02650037.
| S-EPMC5623366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPhysicians' gestalt is central in the diagnostic pipeline of suspected COVID-19, due to the absence of a single tool allowing conclusive rule in or rule out. The aim of this study was to estimate the diagnostic test characteristics of physician's gestalt for COVID-19 in the emergency department (ED), based on clinical findings or on a combination of clinical findings and bedside imaging results.MethodsFrom April 1 to April 30, 2020, patients with suspected COVID-19 were prospectively enrolled in two EDs. Physicians prospectively dichotomized patients in COVID-19 likely or unlikely twice: after medical evaluation of clinical features (clinical gestalt [CG]) and after evaluation of clinical features and results of lung ultrasound or chest x-ray (clinical and bedside imaging-integrated gestalt [CBIIG]). The final diagnosis was adjudicated after independent review of 30-day follow-up data.ResultsAmong 838 ED enrolled patients, 193 (23%) were finally diagnosed with COVID-19. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of CG and CBIIG for COVID-19 were 80.8% and 91.6% (p < 0.01), 82.9% and 91.4% (p = 0.01), and 78.6% and 91.8% (p < 0.01), respectively. CBIIG had similar AUC and sensitivity to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 on the first nasopharyngeal swab per se (93.5%, p = 0.24; and 87%, p = 0.17, respectively). CBIIG plus RT-PCR had a sensitivity of 98.4% for COVID-19 (p < 0.01 vs. RT-PCR alone) compared to 95.9% for CG plus RT-PCR (p = 0.05).ConclusionsIn suspected COVID-19, CG and CBIIG have fair diagnostic accuracy, in line with physicians' gestalt for other acute conditions. Negative RT-PCR plus low probability based on CBIIG can rule out COVID-19 with a relatively low number of false-negative cases.
| S-EPMC8014604 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Within the UK, chest pain is one of the most common reasons for emergency (999) ambulance calls and the most common reason for emergency hospital admission. Diagnosing acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in a patient with chest pain in the prehospital setting by a paramedic is challenging. The Troponin-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (T-MACS) decision rule is a validated tool used in the emergency department (ED) to stratify patients with suspected ACS following a single blood test.We are seeking to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the T-MACS decision aid algorithm to 'rule out' ACS when used in the prehospital environment with point-of-care troponin assays. If successful, this could allow paramedics to immediately rule out ACS for patients in the 'very low risk' group and avoid the need for transport to the ED, while also risk stratifying other patients using a single blood sample taken in the prehospital setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will recruit patients who call emergency (999) ambulance services where the responding paramedic suspects cardiac chest pain. The data required to apply T-MACS will be prospectively recorded by paramedics who are responding to each patient. Paramedics will be required to draw a venous blood sample at the time of arrival to the patient. Blood samples will later be tested in batches for cardiac troponin, using commercially available troponin assays. The primary outcome will be a diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction, established at the time of initial hospital admission. The secondary outcomes will include any major adverse cardiac events within 30 days of enrolment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study obtained approval from the National Research Ethics Service (reference: 18/ES/0101) and the Health Research Authority. We will publish our findings in a high impact general medical journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov, study ID: NCT03561051.
| S-EPMC6830682 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Overall accuracy measures of medical tests are often used with unclear interpretations. To develop methods of calculating the overall accuracy of medical tests in the patient population. Algebraic equations based on Bayes' theorem. A new approach is proposed for calculating overall accuracy in the patient population. Examples and applications using published data are presented. The overall accuracy is the proportion of the correct test results. We introduce a clear distinction between the overall accuracy measures of medical tests that are aimed at the detection of a disease in a screening of populations for public health purposes in the general population and the overall accuracy measures of tests aimed at determining a diagnosis in individuals in a clinical setting. We show that the overall detection accuracy measure is obtained in a specific study that explores test accuracy among persons with known diagnoses and may be useful for public health screening tests. It is different from the overall diagnostic accuracy that could be calculated in the clinical setting for the evaluation of medical tests aimed at determining the individual patients' diagnoses. We show that the overall detection accuracy is constant and is not affected by the prevalence of the disease. In contrast, the overall diagnostic accuracy changes and is dependent on the prevalence. Moreover, it ranges according to the ratio between the sensitivity and specificity. Thus, when the sensitivity is greater than the specificity, the overall diagnostic accuracy increases with increasing prevalence, and vice versa, that is, when the sensitivity is lower than the specificity, the overall diagnostic accuracy decreases with increasing prevalence so that another test might be more useful for diagnostic procedures. Our paper suggests a new and more appropriate methodology for estimating the overall diagnostic accuracy of any medical test. This may be important for helping clinicians avoid errors.
| S-EPMC6186004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDelirium affects > 15% of hospitalised patients but is grossly underdetected, contributing to poor care. The 4 'A's Test (4AT, www.the4AT.com ) is a short delirium assessment tool designed for routine use without special training. The primary objective was to assess the accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection. The secondary objective was to compare the 4AT with another commonly used delirium assessment tool, the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM).MethodsThis was a prospective diagnostic test accuracy study set in emergency departments or acute medical wards involving acute medical patients aged ≥ 70. All those without acutely life-threatening illness or coma were eligible. Patients underwent (1) reference standard delirium assessment based on DSM-IV criteria and (2) were randomised to either the index test (4AT, scores 0-12; prespecified score of > 3 considered positive) or the comparator (CAM; scored positive or negative), in a random order, using computer-generated pseudo-random numbers, stratified by study site, with block allocation. Reference standard and 4AT or CAM assessments were performed by pairs of independent raters blinded to the results of the other assessment.ResultsEight hundred forty-three individuals were randomised: 21 withdrew, 3 lost contact, 32 indeterminate diagnosis, 2 missing outcome, and 785 were included in the analysis. Mean age was 81.4 (SD 6.4) years. 12.1% (95/785) had delirium by reference standard assessment, 14.3% (56/392) by 4AT, and 4.7% (18/384) by CAM. The 4AT had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.96). The 4AT had a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61-87%) and a specificity of 94% (95% CI 92-97%). The CAM had a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26-57%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98-100%).ConclusionsThe 4AT is a short, pragmatic tool which can help improving detection rates of delirium in routine clinical care.Trial registrationInternational standard randomised controlled trial number (ISRCTN) 53388093 . Date applied 30/05/2014; date assigned 02/06/2014.
| S-EPMC6651960 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAn estimated 87% of torture survivors experience chronic pain such as brachial plexopathy from upper extremity suspension or lumbosacral plexus injury from leg hyperextension. However, a vast majority of pain is undetected by evaluators due to a lack of diagnostic tools and confounding psychiatric illness. This diagnostic gap results in exclusive psychological treatment rather than multimodal therapies, substantially limiting rehabilitation. We hypothesized that the United Nations Istanbul Protocol (UNIP) would have a sensitivity of approximately 15% for pain detection, and that the use of a validated pain screen would improve its sensitivity by at least 29%, as compared to the reference standard (pain specialist evaluation).Methods and findingsThis prospective blind-comparison-to-gold-standard study of survivors of torture, as defined by the World Medical Association, took place at Weill Cornell Medicine between February 1, 2017, and June 21, 2019. 11 women and 9 men, for a total of 20 participants, were included in the analysis. Five participants received 2 UNIP evaluations, for a total of 25 unique evaluations included in the analysis. Participants were representative of a global population, with home countries in Africa, Central America, South Asia, the Caribbean, and the Middle East. Methods of torture experienced were homogeneous, following the predictable pattern of systematic torture. Participants first received the standard evaluation protocol for torture survivors (UNIP) by a trained evaluator, and subsequently received a validated pain screen (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPISF]) followed by a noninvasive examination by a pain specialist physician (reference standard). The primary outcome was the diagnostic and treatment capability of the standard protocol (index test) versus the validated pain screen (BPISF), as compared to the reference standard. Trained evaluators performing the initial assessment with the UNIP (index test) were blinded to the study, and the pain specialist physician (reference standard) was blinded to the outcome of the initial UNIP evaluation and the BPISF; data from the initial UNIP assessment were not gathered by the principal investigator until all other study procedures were completed. Providers using only the UNIP captured pain in a maximum of 16% of evaluations, as compared to 85% of participants being diagnosed with pain by the reference standard. When employed, the validated pain screen had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 72%-100%) and a negative predictive value of 100%, as compared to a sensitivity of 24% (95% CI 8%-50%) and a negative predictive value of 19% (95% CI 5%-46%) for the index test. The difference in the sensitivity of the UNIP as compared to the BPISF was significant, with p < 0.001. No adverse events owing to participation in the study were reported by participants. Limitations of the study include small sample size, its single-site nature, and the exclusion of individuals who did not speak 1 of the 5 study languages.ConclusionsThese data indicate that a validated pain screen can supplement the current global standard assessment of torture survivors, the UNIP, to increase the accuracy of pain diagnosis.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03018782.
| S-EPMC7274371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo study the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and laboratory features in the diagnosis of central nervous system (CNS) infection and bacterial meningitis.MethodsWe included consecutive adult episodes with suspected CNS infection who underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) examination. The reference standard was the diagnosis classified into five categories: 1) CNS infection; 2) CNS inflammation without infection; 3) other neurological disorder; 4) non-neurological infection; and 5) other systemic disorder.ResultsBetween 2012 and 2015, 363 episodes of suspected CNS infection were included. CSF examination showed leucocyte count >5/mm3 in 47% of episodes. Overall, 89 of 363 episodes were categorized as CNS infection (25%; most commonly viral meningitis [7%], bacterial meningitis [7%], and viral encephalitis [4%]), 36 (10%) episodes as CNS inflammatory disorder, 111 (31%) as systemic infection, in 119 (33%) as other neurological disorder, and 8 (2%) as other systemic disorders. Diagnostic accuracy of individual clinical characteristics and blood tests for the diagnosis of CNS infection or bacterial meningitis was low. CSF leucocytosis differentiated best between bacterial meningitis and other diagnoses (area under the curve [AUC] 0.95) or any neurological infection versus other diagnoses (AUC 0.93).ConclusionsClinical characteristics fail to differentiate between neurological infections and other diagnoses, and CSF analysis is the main contributor to the final diagnosis.
| S-EPMC7612037 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Achieving the upper limits of face identification accuracy in forensic applications can minimize errors that have profound social and personal consequences. Although forensic examiners identify faces in these applications, systematic tests of their accuracy are rare. How can we achieve the most accurate face identification: using people and/or machines working alone or in collaboration? In a comprehensive comparison of face identification by humans and computers, we found that forensic facial examiners, facial reviewers, and superrecognizers were more accurate than fingerprint examiners and students on a challenging face identification test. Individual performance on the test varied widely. On the same test, four deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs), developed between 2015 and 2017, identified faces within the range of human accuracy. Accuracy of the algorithms increased steadily over time, with the most recent DCNN scoring above the median of the forensic facial examiners. Using crowd-sourcing methods, we fused the judgments of multiple forensic facial examiners by averaging their rating-based identity judgments. Accuracy was substantially better for fused judgments than for individuals working alone. Fusion also served to stabilize performance, boosting the scores of lower-performing individuals and decreasing variability. Single forensic facial examiners fused with the best algorithm were more accurate than the combination of two examiners. Therefore, collaboration among humans and between humans and machines offers tangible benefits to face identification accuracy in important applications. These results offer an evidence-based roadmap for achieving the most accurate face identification possible.
| S-EPMC6004481 | biostudies-literature