Women’s health is an important area to consider. Particularly, the critical stage in their life is the stage when they achieve the motherhood. Numerous care specialists investigated this specific stage so as to gain insights of clinical importance. In such context, the present description deals with a topic, Mammography-Literature review on Breast compression.
Briefly, a breast compression refers to ‘breast flattening’ such that the adequate quantity of tissue could be visualized through imaging and tested, during a mammographic examination (Breast Compression,2015)
Rationale: Breast compression, at the time of mammography, is one of the various fundamental technical approaches in the development of an efficient and analytic mammogram.
The reason for the breast compression at the time of mammography is to refine the image quality and consequently the perception of tiny sores by decreasing the thickness of the breast. (Poulos and McLean, 2004).
Compression and image quality:
Image quality is vital in mammography to better understand the breast compression and the related changes. In one study, analysts reported that the image quality and the inconvenience confronted were being impacted by the measure of breast compression used at the time of mammography (Poulos, et al., 2003). To check this, researchers examined the relationship between the force of the applied pressure, breast thickness, reported distress and the image quality. Here, the sample comprised of the women who were attending to the routine breast screening at a Breast Screen center in Australia. During, the mammographies methodology, an "additional" craniocaudal (CC) film was taken at a lessened level of pressure running from 10 to 30 newtons.
Breast thickness estimations were done for both the typical and the additional CC film. Information related to the uneasiness experienced, current breast pain, menstrual status, cup size, and breast issues were additionally recorded. Radiologists were instructed to look at the image quality of the subjects and control films (Poulos, et al., 2003).
Later, the results indicated that 25% of the ladies did not encounter a distinction in thickness when the pressure was decreased. This finding served as a critical new discovery in light of the fact that the point of breast compression is to decrease the breast thickness. However, in the event, that the breast thickness is not decreased when the pressure is applied, then distress could expand with no advantage in the image quality. This suggested that an adequate amount of breast compression is much necessary to the practice area related to the mammography.
Likewise, radiologists found a decline in the greasy territory of the breast between the typical and the additional CC films. This confirmed that a reduction in the image quality could occur because of inadequate pressure applied (Poulos, et al., 2003).
Pain during mammography:
According to the sources, a large number of women encounter pain during mammography, especially when they receive traditional therapy for the breast malignancy (Kornguth et al., 2000). Pain could stop asymptomatic women from attending to a prolonged breast cancer screening program (Andrews, 2001). As such, a rising proportion of women who underwent breast conserving surgery need to tolerate the post-treatment mammograms through follow-ups
(de Groot et al., 2014).
Indeed, some of the risk factors believed to influence pain are tenderness of breast, anxiety, expectation about the pain and attitude of the staff (Bruyninckx et al., 1999).
Earlier, Kashikar-Zuck et al. (1997) analyzed how pain, adapting adequacy and pain, adapting procedures were identified at the time of mammography. In that study, subjects were 125 ladies beyond 50 years old who experienced mammogram screening. Before their mammogram, all subjects were instructed to finish the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ). This was done to find out how women adapt to the everyday pain encounters. It was observed that ladies who rated their capacity to reduce pain as high, described lower normal levels of mammography pain, lower evaluations on the mammography pain/inconvenience scale and were a great deal more inclined to have lower levels of pain at the time of their last mammogram (Kashikar-Zuck et al.,1997). This implied that women were able to experience a low-level pain.
On the other hand, mammography examination was believed to induce a negative belief among some women. In this regard, Freitas et al. (2006) reported that even after the examination of the breast, the mental and physical injury left might prompt ladies to keep away from the subsequent examinations or even to remark with their friends and relatives, thus avoiding the further mammographies checkups.
In this way, the uneasiness and pain appear to serve as the successive protests at the time of the examination. In this study, a group of scientists has assessed the recurrence of distress and pain amid mammography and recognize variables identified with these protests.
They have made a planned study that recruited 2,165 patients from 997 government and 1170 private medical services (Freitas et al., 2006). After the examination, the pain was evaluated by the patient and the inconvenience was subjectively assessed by multivariate examination by the study team.
Then, according to the outcomes, the distress accounted for by 91% of patients; and among these, 13% reported the pain sensation to be serious. Just 2% of the sample revealed that they did not encounter pain at the time of the examination. This finding relied on the variables related to the pain such as understanding, age, prophylactic use (ACO), earlier mastalgia and private patients.
Most importantly, the uneasiness was freely associated with the service where the process was carried out. This implied pain, discomfort felt at the clinics. The study also implied that young ladies who were under 50 years, ACO clients, transporters of mastalgia and from the private administrations demonstrated a more noteworthy force of pain and uneasiness at the time of mammography (Freitas et al., 2006).
Hence, measures to alleviate pain in such centers are suggestive.
In the similar direction, a prior examination reported that the demographic components, for example, age and level of education and previous breast pathologies of the patient were critical in reporting pain amid mammography (Gupta, et al., 2003). Patients surviving with the breast lumps, prior breast pain and those determined to have breast’s inflammatory conditions and fibrocystic alterations experienced more pain at the time of mammography. As such, scientists mentioned that an appropriate evaluation of pain utilizing standard measures and its relationship with the breast pathologies and demographic elements is vital for arranging pain management in ladies experiencing mammography (Gupta, et al., 2003).
The influence of compression on screening compliance:
Screening mammography is an x-ray based method connected to a woman who has no signs or side effects of breast ailment and is utilized for the early recognition of breast malignancy. A definitive motivation behind screening is not to distinguish breast disease at an early stage, but to protect the lives. An additional advantage of screening is that little, screen-distinguished tumors may be adequately treated with the less forceful and unforgiving regimens than the bigger tumors (Saving Women's Lives, 2005).
However, the pain during mammography is perceived as a critical obstruction to breast screening and in this manner may influence the achievement or success of a screening program. Analysts reported that the intervention that can possibly recommend critical diminishment in the pain and inconvenience could be a patient controlled pressure (Miller, Martin and Herbison, 2002).
This infers that compression during the mammography impacts the screening.
Feig (2004) reported that the principle dangers and other antagonistic results from the screening mammography contribute to the uneasiness from the breast compression, review for extra imaging, and false positive biopsies. But, in spite of the belief that these dangerous influence a large population of ladies than the individuals who advantage of the screening, the dangers are considered to be less noteworthy. But, among ladies it gives the idea that the compliance related to the screening has diminished on account of some wrong convictions about the mammography. Critics on mammography have emerged on account of inquiries regarding its adequacy, as well as fears that it may really bring about damage. Some experts have mentioned about mammography driven harms that include physical, enthusiastic, social, monetary, intergenerational, or mental mischief (Saving Women's Lives, 2005).
But, a report by Fieg (2004) stated that despite the fact that there is some anxiety and tension prior to the screening, the interests of most ladies for the estimation of early recognition has not diminished. Overall, these trends imply that although compression is pain related process, women’s compliance with the screening could vary.
Impact of the Radiographer:
A mammographer is a qualified radiographer who takes extensive training to accomplish the mission of performing the imaging procedures (Mammographic Examination,n.d).
A radiographer along these lines sees how radiation functions in the body. She additionally possesses a complete awareness of anatomical structures and the ways to deliver the best image of particular body parts.
The radiographer (mammographer) applies the pressure to the breasts in a controlled way. The mammographer controls both the rate and the power of the pressure by the utilization of a foot control. A further control can be utilized to 'adjust' the measure of pressure. The mammographer will deliberately judge the suitable level of pressure which is required. She will search and feel for the rigidity (immovability of the skin). She will likewise keep a note of the numerical scale which shows the measure of pressure utilized (Mammographic Examination, n.d)
Aside from this, the radiographer could also decide the accurate breast positioning on breast compression (Dustler et al., 2012). This is because the tissue types in the breast are with different mechanical properties and thus there will be a differing reaction to the force applied (Krouskop et al., 1998). However, according to one study, there could be an obstruction of breast compression from the interfering rigid structures such as the anterior auxiliary fold and pectoral muscle visible in the MLO (Medio Lateral Oblique)-projection (Förnvik et al., 2010; Lundgren, 1977).
Dustler et al. (2012) examined the variations in the breast compression, prior to and after their repositioning to avoid 1 cm of the juxtathoracic part. Twenty-one ladies were incorporated into the study. Contrasted with conventional positioning, breasts were more slender by 4.5±2.4 mm (from 50.4 mm to 46 mm) and had a 12.4±24.6 cm 2 bigger territory over which weight was circulated (from 97.6 cm2 to 109.9 cm2), in spite of less of the breast being incorporated into the projection. This showed that the consideration of the juxtathoracic structures and pectoral muscle in the MLO-projection considerably influences the weight dispersion and avoids the appropriate pressure of the breast. These outcomes proposed that the precise positioning of the MLO-projection must be painstakingly assessed with a specific end goal to discover a smooth compliance between the breast compression and tissue care (Dustler et al., 2012).
Thus, the radiographer could influence the breast mammography by emphasizing on the precise positioning.
Conclusion:
Breast compression, in mammography, is an important procedure for the women who wish to have their breast imaged and tested to detect any breast aberrations or malignancies. Its application has advantages and also drawbacks. Most importantly, the outcome of this procedure is linked to several factors. The factors may be the breast thickness, image quality, pain, breast positioning during mammography. However, these factors also rely on the radiographer during the mammography. The radiographer plays a key role in producing the quality images without disregarding the attitudes of patients (women) referred to such procedure. So, it is essential for the public and health experts to become aware of this procedure through the awareness and mutual cooperation.
References
Andrews, F.J. (2001). Pain during mammography: implications for breast screening
programmes. Australas Radiol, 45(2),113–7.
Breast Compression.(2015).Retrieved from
https://definedterm.com/breast_compression
Bruyninckx, E., Mortelmans, D., Van Goethem, M. & Van Hove, E. (1999). Risk factors of pain
in mammographic screening. Soc Sci Med, 49(7),933-41.
de Groot, J.E., Broeders, M.J., Branderhorst, W., den Heeten, G.J. & Grimbergen, C.A. (2014).
Mammographic compression after breast conserving therapy: controlling pressure instead
of force. Med Phys, 41(2),023501.
Dustler,M., Andersson,I., Förnvik,D. & Tingberg,A. (2012).The Effect of Breast Positioning on
Breast Compression in Mammography: a Pressure Distribution. Proc. of SPIE, (8313),
83134M-1
Feig, S.A.(2004).Adverse effects of screening mammography. Radiol Clin North Am,
42(5), 807-19
Freitas, R., Fiori, W.F., Ramos, F.J., Godinho, E., Rahal, R.M. & de Oliveira, J.G. (2006).
Discomfort and pain during mammography. Rev Assoc Med Bras,52(5),333-6.
Förnvik, D., Andersson, I., Svahn, T.,Timberg, P., Zackrisson, S. & Tingberg, A. (2010).The
effect of reduced breast compression in breast tomosynthesis: human observer study using
clinical cases,” Radiation protection dosimetry, 139(1-3), 118-23.
Gupta, R., Nayak, M., Khoursheed, M., Roy, S. & Behbehani, A.I. (2003). Pain during
mammography: impact of breast pathologies and demographic factors.
Med Princ Pract,12(3),180-3.
Kashikar-Zuck, S., Keefe, F.J., Kornguth, P., Beaupre, P., Holzberg, A. & Delong, D. (1997).
Pain coping and the pain experience during mammography: a preliminary study.
Pain,73(2),165-72.
Krouskop,T.A., Wheeler,T.M., Kallel et al. (1998). Elastic moduli of breast and prostate tissues
under compression. Ultrasonic imaging, 20(4), 260-74 (1998).
Kornguth, P.J., Keefe,F.J., Wright, K.R. & Delong, D.M. (2000). Mammography pain in women
treated conservatively for breast cancer. J Pain,1(4),268–74.
Lundgren, B. The oblique view of mammography.(1977). British j radiology, 50(597), 626-8
Mammographic Examination.(n.d). Retrieved from http://wommen.org.uk/mammographic-
examination/
Miller, D., Martin, I. & Herbison, P. (2002). Interventions for relieving the pain and discomfort
of screening mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, (4),CD002942.
Poulos, A. & McLean, D. (2004). The application of breast compression in mammography: a
new Perspective. Radiography,10(2),131-137.
Poulos, A., McLean, D., Rickard, M. & Heard, R.(2003). Breast compression in mammography:
how much is enough? Australas Radiol, 47(2),121-6.
Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis.(2005).
Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22311/
