The number of mammography facilities accredited by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continued its slow decline in the FDA's most recent reporting period.
As of September 1, there were 8,646 mammography facilities accredited in the U.S., down 0.8% compared to 8,713 facilities in operation as of October 1, 2009. The FDA also noted that 5,903 facilities have accredited full-field digital mammography units.
Mammography facilities accredited under MQSA, by reporting period
|
||||||||||||||||||
| MQSA = Mammography Quality Standards Act |
The percentage of inspections where the highest noncompliance was a level 1 violation (the facility fails to meet a key MQSA requirement that may compromise the quality of mammography services) was 0.8%.
For level 2 violations (meets all key MQSA requirements but fails to meet one or more MQSA standards), the percentage was 14.5%, and for level 3 violations (incomplete record keeping and failure to have systems for tracking and recording minor violations), it was 3.4%. The vast majority of facilities, or 81.2%, came through with no violations.
The total number of annual mammography procedures reported was 38.8 million, according to the FDA, representing a 5% increase compared to 37 million as of September 1, 2009.
Related Reading
Number of U.S. mammo facilities drops, September 2, 2009
Report: Mammography market to continue growth, August 31, 2009
Mammography procedure volume drops 16% since 2000, March 17, 2009
AJR studies show decline in mammo use, workforce shortages, February 3, 2009
Copyright © 2010 AuntMinnie.com
![A normal mammogram confirmed by three-year radiologic follow-up illustrates reader-marked regions of interest (ROIs) during (A) unaided (round 1) and (B) artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted (round 2) reading. Each colored dot represents an ROI for recall by a human reader. Readers could mark more than one ROI per case, represented by multiple dots of the same color. During AI-assisted reading, the AI system displayed three visible prompts: two with suspicion of malignancy scores of 35% (left mediolateral oblique [L MLO] and craniocaudal [L CC]) and one with a suspicion of malignancy score of 10% (right craniocaudal [R CC]), shown as polygonal overlays. Without AI, six of 10 readers (60%) marked a false-positive ROI. With AI assistance, this fell to two of 10 (20%). R MLO = right mediolateral oblique.](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/07/2026-07-14-radiology-mammogram-ai-auto-bias.H0bYO8QlWs.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=100&q=70&w=100)





![A normal mammogram confirmed by three-year radiologic follow-up illustrates reader-marked regions of interest (ROIs) during (A) unaided (round 1) and (B) artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted (round 2) reading. Each colored dot represents an ROI for recall by a human reader. Readers could mark more than one ROI per case, represented by multiple dots of the same color. During AI-assisted reading, the AI system displayed three visible prompts: two with suspicion of malignancy scores of 35% (left mediolateral oblique [L MLO] and craniocaudal [L CC]) and one with a suspicion of malignancy score of 10% (right craniocaudal [R CC]), shown as polygonal overlays. Without AI, six of 10 readers (60%) marked a false-positive ROI. With AI assistance, this fell to two of 10 (20%). R MLO = right mediolateral oblique.](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/07/2026-07-14-radiology-mammogram-ai-auto-bias.H0bYO8QlWs.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=112&q=70&w=112)










