Health  Vol.7 No.1 , January 2015
Quantification of the Pain and Physical Burden Experienced during Positioning for Craniocaudal Imaging in Mammography, Evaluated by Measurement of Muscle Activity
Abstract: Mammography is carried out in a special position, i.e. “an image is taken while the breast is compressed, stretched and kept in a fixed position”. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate quantitatively and qualitatively the physical and psychological burden due to positioning and breast compression during mammography. Muscle activity of each part of the body during positioning for the standard imaging method, to obtain craniocaudal (CC) view images, was measured in 15 adult females using surface EMG. The associated pain was analyzed using visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. During positioning for the CC view, muscle activity was highest in the biceps (24.44 iEMG/s) followed by the trapezius (17.78 iEMG/s) on the imaging side. Muscle activity of the biceps and the sternocleidomastoid on the imaging side showed significant differences compared with pre-imaging activity (biceps P < 0.031, sternocleidomastoid P < 0.005). The pain during mammography was rated as moderate to severe pain (VAS = 3.3 - 6.7) for CC views. As a result, the activities of not only the muscles directly involved in mammography positioning but also those indirectly involved were high as compared with the normal state. Measurement of muscle activity during mammography is expected to be used effectively, such as in the care to reduce pain for the subjects.
Cite this paper: Uchiyama, M. , Lee, Y. , Kazama, K. , Minagawa, Y. and Tsurumaki, M. (2015) Quantification of the Pain and Physical Burden Experienced during Positioning for Craniocaudal Imaging in Mammography, Evaluated by Measurement of Muscle Activity. Health, 7, 23-34. doi: 10.4236/health.2015.71004.

[1]   Henrich, R.E., Baett, L., Botsco, M.A., Deibei, D., Feig, S. and Gray, J. (1999) Mammography Quality Control Manual: Patient Positioning and Compression. American College of Radiology, 30-75.

[2]   Haus, A.G. (2002) Historical Technical Developments in Mammography. Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment, 1, 119-126.

[3]   Ng, K.H. and Muttarak, M. (2003) Advances in Mammography Have Improved Early Detection of Breast Cancer. J. HK. Coll. Radiol., 6, 126-131.

[4]   Ng, K.H., Jamal, N. and DeWerd, L. (2006) Global Quality Control Perspective for the Physical and Technical Aspects of Screen-Film Mammography—Image Quality and Radiation Dose. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 121, 445-451.

[5]   Yamada, T. (2010) Current Status and Issues of Screening Digital Mammography in Japan. Breast Cancer, 17, 163- 168.

[6]   Thomassin-N.I., Perrot, N., Dechoux, S., Ribeiro, C., Chopier J. and de Bazelaire, C. (2014) Added Value of One- View Breast Tomosynthesis Combined with Digital Mammography According to Reader Experience. European Journal of Radiology, 84, 235-241.

[7]   Cederstrom, B. and Fredenberg, E. (2014) The Influence of Anatomical Noise on Optimal Beam Quality in Mammography. Medical Physics, 41, Article ID: 121903.

[8]   Hendrick, R.E., Helvie, M.A. and Hardesty, L.A. (2014) Implications of CISNET Modeling on Number Needed to Screen and Mortality Reduction with Digital Mammography in Women 40-49 Years Old. American Journal of Roentgenology, 203, 1379-1381.

[9]   Lee, C.I., Cevik, M., Alagoz, O., Sprague, B.L., Tosteson, A.N., Miglioretti, D.L., Kerlikowske, K., Stout, N.K., Jarvik, J.G., Ramsey, S.D. and Lehman, C.D. (2014) Comparative Effectiveness of Combined Digital Mammography and Tomosynthesis Screening for Women with Dense Breasts. Radiology, 30 May 2014, Article ID: 141237.

[10]   Molina, Y., Beresford, S.A., Espinoza, N. and Thompson, B. (2014) Psychological Distress, Social Withdrawal, and Coping Following Receipt of an Abnormal Mammogram among Different Ethnicities: A Mediation Model. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41, 523-532.

[11]   Lee-Lin, F., Domenico, L.J., Ogden, L.A., Fromwiller, V., Magathan, N., Vail, S. and Gorman, P.N. (2014) Academic-Community Partnership Development Lessons Learned: Evidence-Based Interventions to Increase Screening Mammography in Rural Communities. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 29, 379-385.

[12]   Purtzer, M.A. and Overstreet, L. (2014) Transformative Learning Theory: Facilitating Mammography Screening in Rural Women. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41, 176-184.

[13]   Kornguth, P.J., Keefe, F.J. and Conaway, M.R. (1996) Pain during Mammography: Characteristics and Relationship to Demographic and Medical Variables. Pain, 66, 187-194.

[14]   Sapir, R., Patlas, M., Strano, S.D., Hadas-Halpern, I. and Cherny, N.I. (2003) Does Mammography Hurt? Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 25, 53-63.

[15]   Brett, J., Bankhead, C., Henderson, B., Watson, E. and Austoker, J. (2005) The Psychological Impact of Mammographic Screening: A Systematic Review. Psychooncology, 14, 917-938.

[16]   Gram, I.T., Lund, E. and Slenker, S.E. (1990) Quality of Life Following a False Positive Mammogram. British Journal of Cancer, 62, 1018-1022.

[17]   Taguchi, R., Yamazaki, Y. and Nakayama, K. (2010) Eliciting Preferences for Mammography: Using a Discrete Choice Experiment Approach. Japanese Journal of Public Health, 57, 83-94.

[18]   Sharp, P.C., Michielutte, R., Freimanis, R., Cunningham, L., Spangler, J. and Burnette, V. (2003) Reported Pain Following Mammography Screening. Archives of Internal Medicine, 163, 833-836.

[19]   Hagen, S., Goodwin, E. and Sinclair, L. (2008) Sitting vs. Standing during Screening Mammography. Radiologic Technology, 79, 214-220.

[20]   De Luca, C.J. (2002) Surface Electromyography: Detection and Recording. DelSys Incorporated, 2-10.

[21]   Kizuka, T., Masuda, T., Kiryu, T. and Sadoyama, T. (2006) Biomechanism Library Practical Usage of Surface Electromyogram. Tokyo Denki University Press, Tokyo.

[22]   Jeitler, M., Brunnhuber, S., Meier, L., Lüdtke, R., Büssing, A., Kessler, C. and Michalsen, A. (2014) Effectiveness of Jyoti Meditation for Patients with Chronic Neck Pain and Psychological Distress—A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. The Journal of Pain, 3, 1-28.

[23]   Watanabe, M., Kaneoka, K., Wada, Y., Matsui, Y. and Miyakawa, S. (2014) Trunk Muscle Activity with Different Sitting Postures and Pelvic Inclination. Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 27, 531-536.

[24]   Maekawa, Y., Shiozaki, A. and Majima, Y. (2012) A Study on Visualizing the Twist and the Load on the Lumbar Region in Nursing Care. Nursing Informatics, 23, 1-5.

[25]   Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Kazama, K., Minagawa, Y., Tsai, D.Y., Sadakata, M. and Sayama, M. (2011) A Preliminary Study on Measurement of Muscle Activity during Mammography Positioning. Japanese Journal of Radio-Logical Technology, 67, 679-682.

[26]   Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Sadakata, M., Sayama, M. and Tsai, D.Y. (2012) Measurement of Muscle Activities for Evaluating Physical Burden and Pain during Mammography Positioning. The Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine, 228, 53-58.

[27]   Dinash, G., Daniel, K., Len, G. and John, G. (2001) Examining the Validity of Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scales: Developing and Using Illustrated Patient Simulations to Collect the Data. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 10, 697-706.

[28]   Japan Radiology Congress, Japanese Society of Radiological Technology (2010) Mammography Guidelines. Third Edition, Igakusyoin, Tokyo, 7-13.

[29]   Boullosa, D.A., Hautala, A.J. and Leicht, A.S. (2014) Introduction to the Research Topic: The Role of Physical Fitness on Cardiovascular Responses to Stress. Frontiers in Physiology, 5, 1-2.

[30]   Bernard, K. and Adachi, K. (2008) Understanding Muscles: A Practical Guide to Muscles Function. Second Edition, Medical Science International, Tokyo, 218-225.

[31]   Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Kazama, K., Minagawa, Y., Tsai, D.Y., Sadakata, M. and Sayama, M. (2012) Quantitative Assessment of Muscle Activity in Mammography Positioning. Proceedings of the XX IMEKO World Congress, Busan, 9-14 September 2012, TC13-P-1, 1-4.

[32]   Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Sadakata, M., Tsai, D.Y. and Sayama, M. (2013) Effects of Mammography Positioning on the Autonomic Nervous Function. Health, 5, 1335-1341.

[33]   Lee, Y. and Uchiyama, M. (2014) Evaluation of Physical and Psychological Burden of Subjects in Mammography. Proceedings of the IWDM World Congress, Gifu City, 29 June-2 July 2014, Vol. LNCS8539, 508-513.

[34]   Uchiyama, M. (2014) The Experience of Mammography Based on the Memoirs of Examinees. Health, 6, 1310-1314.