Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 129–134 | Cite as

Detection and Description of Small Breast Masses by Residents Trained Using a Standardized Clinical Breast Exam Curriculum

  • Elizabeth Steiner
  • Donald F. Austin
  • Nancy C. Prouser
Original Article



We evaluated the effect of standardized clinical breast examination (CBE) training on residents’ ability to detect a 3-mm breast mass in a silicone breast model.


In this nonrandomized controlled trial, 75 first year residents (R1s) at 8 family medicine, internal medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology training programs received the intervention and second year residents (R2s) did not. Trained residency faculty taught R1s vertical strip, three-pressure method (VS3PM) CBE using a standardized curriculum, including a 1- to 2-hour online self-study with video and 2.5-hour practicum using silicone models and a trained patient surrogate.


Solitary mass detection: 84% by R1s, 46% by R2s (RR = 1.82, 95%CI = 1.36, 2.43, P < 0.0001). Of those finding a mass, 62% of R1s and 10% of R2s used at least 5 of 8 standardized descriptors (RR = 6.19, 95%CI = 2.06, 18.59, P = 0.001). R1s false positive findings were not statistically different from R2s (P = 0.54). Both the use of VS3PM and total time spent on CBE were independently highly predictive of finding the mass in either group.


Most untrained primary care residents are not proficient in CBE. Standardized VS3PM CBE training improves the ability to detect and describe a small mass in a silicone breast model. Better CBE training for residents may improve the early detection of breast cancer.


breast cancer medical education clinical breast examination early detection 


  1. 1.
    Society AC. Estimated new cancer cases and death by sex for all sites, US, 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Society AC. Probability of developing invasive cancers over selected age intervals, by sex, US, 1998–2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Surveillance E, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Incidence—SEER 17 Regs Public—Use, Nov 2005 Sub (1973–2003 varying). National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch. Accessed May 3, 2007, 2007.
  4. 4.
    Randal J. High expectations for mammography at heart of many breast cancer malpractice cases. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(6):429–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bancej C, Decker K, Chiarelli A, Harrison M, Turner D, Brisson J. Contribution of clinical breast examination to mammography screening in the early detection of breast cancer. J Med Screen. 2003;10(1):16–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Park B, Suent-Ii K, Mi Hye K, Eun-Kyung K, Se Ho P, Kyong Sik L. Clinical breast examination for screening of asymptomatic women: the importance of clinical breast examination for breast cancer detection. Yonsei Med J. 2000;41:312–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carney P, Miglioretti D, Yankaskas B, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):168–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baines CJ, Bassett AA. Physical examination. Its role as a single screening modality in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Cancer. 1989;63(9):1816–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller A, Baines C, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49 years. Can Med Assoc J. 1992;147(10):1459–76.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller A, Baines C, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 2. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50 to 59 years. Can Med Assoc J. 1992;147(10):1477–88.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baines CJ, Miller AB. Mammography versus clinical examination of the breasts. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;22:125–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lane D, Burg M. Promoting physician preventative practices: needs assessment for CME in breast cancer detection. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 1989;9:245–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Warner S, Sorden J, Solomon L. Physician interest in breast cancer screening education. A survey of Vermont family physicians. J Fam Pract. 1989;29:281–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Costanza M, Luckmann R, Quirk M, Clemow L, White M, Stoddard A. The effectiveness of using standardized patients to improve community physician skills in mammography counseling and clinical breast exam. Prev Med. 1999;29:241–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fletcher S. Following up abnormal breast cancer screening results: lessons for primary care clinicians. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2000;13(2):152–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saslow D, Hannan J, Osuch J, et al. Clinical breast examination: practical recommendations for optimizing performance and reporting. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004;54(6):327–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McDonald S, Saslow D, Alciati M. Performance and reporting of clinical breast examination: a review of the literature. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004;54(6):345–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fletcher SW, O’Malley MS, Bunce LA. Physicians’ abilities to detect lumps in silicone breast models. JAMA. 1985;253(15):2224–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vetto JT, Petty JK, Dunn N, Prouser N, Austin D. Structured clinical breast examination (CBE) training results in objective improvement in CBE skills. J Cancer Educ. 2002;17(3):124–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oregon Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Algorithms for evaluation of abnormal findings. Accessed March 31, 2005.
  21. 21.
    Barton M, Harris R, Fletcher S. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: should it be done? How? JAMA. 1999;282:1270–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Campbell HS, Fletcher SW, Pilgrim CA, Morgan TM, Lin S. Improving physicians’ and nurses’ clinical breast examination: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 1991;7(1):1–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(25):1887–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Durning S, Cation L, Markert R, Pangara L. Assessing the reliability and validity of the mini-clinical evaluation exercise for internal medicine residency training. Acad Med. 2002;77(9):900–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dupras D, Li J. Use of an objective structured clinical examination to determine clinical competence. Acad Med. 1995;70:1029–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cuddy M, Dillon G, Clauser B, et al. Assessing the validity of the USMLE step 2 clinical knowledge examination through an evaluation of its clinical relevance. Acad Med. 2004;79(10 Suppl):S43–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Carney PA, Dietrich AJ, Freeman DH Jr, Mott LA. A standardized-patient assessment of a continuing medical education program to improve physicians’ cancer-control clinical skills. Acad Med. 1995;70(1):52–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Data Sharing Project P. PIAA Breast Cancer Claims Study: Physicians’ Insurance Association of America; 2002. PIAA online store.

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth Steiner
    • 1
  • Donald F. Austin
    • 1
  • Nancy C. Prouser
    • 1
  1. 1.OHSU Cancer Institute Breast Health Education ProgramOregon Health & Science UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations