@article{Ma2026, 
author = {Yutong Ma and Yingying Chen and Renqing Jiancan and Xiuzhu Ma and Yun Zhang and Xiaochu Dang and Xuejuan Wang and Zhanlei Zhang and Faqin Lv},
title = {Quality Control Analysis of Normal Breast Imaging using a Remote Ultrasound Robot},
year = {2026},
journal = {Advanced Ultrasound in Diagnosis and Therapy},
volume = {10},
number = {2},
pages = {106-111},
keywords = {5G remote ultrasound robot, Normal mammary gland, Ultrasound imaging, Image quality, Quality control},
url = {https://www.sciopen.com/article/10.26599/AUDT.2026.250069},
doi = {10.26599/AUDT.2026.250069},
abstract = {Objective To explore the quality control value of 5G remote ultrasound robot in normal breast imaging.Methods Fifty female volunteers from Xizang were selected to undergo routine breast examinations using 5G remote ultrasound robot (robot group) and on-site ultrasound (control group). Longitudinal and transverse continuous scanning methods were used to collect and save images respectively. The two groups of images were scored for breast imaging quality by five senior attending physicians or above using a blind method according to the Likert scale grading standard. The paired t-test was used to analyze the differences in breast imaging quality scores obtained by five physicians between the two examination methods and the age differences between the two groups of volunteers. The Kappa test was used to analyze the consistency of the image scoring results between the two groups. The χ2 test was used to analyze the ethnic differences between the two groups of volunteers.Results There is no significant age difference between the two groups of volunteers (t = −0.850, P = 0.101, P > 0.05). There is no significant difference in the ethnic proportions between the two groups of volunteers (P = 1.00, P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the scores of the five physicians between the two groups of images (P > 0.05), Doctor A (t = −1.647, P = 0.101), Doctor B (t = −0.943, P = 0.347), Doctor C (t = 0.582, P = 0.561), Doctor D (t = 0.040, P = 0.958), Doctor E (t = 0.144, P = 0.886). The consistency of the scoring results of the five doctors on the two groups of images was good (Kappa = 0.789, 0.753, 0.807, 0.778, 0.823, P < 0.001).Conclusion The remote ultrasound robot has good consistency with the on-site ultrasound imaging quality. The remote ultrasound robot can be used for breast cancer screening in special environments such as high altitude and cold weather.}
}