Literature DB >> 11450279

Preventive health care, 2001 update: should women be routinely taught breast self-examination to screen for breast cancer?

N Baxter1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the evidence relating to the effectiveness of breast self-examination (BSE) to screen for breast cancer and to provide recommendations for routine teaching of BSE to women in various age groups as part of a periodic health examination. OPTIONS: Routine teaching of BSE to women. EVIDENCE: The electronic databases MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, CINAHL, Health-STAR, Current Contents and the Cochrane Library were searched for abstracts and full reports of studies published from 1966 to October 2000 that evaluated the effectiveness of BSE in reducing breast cancer mortality. In addition, references of key papers were searched and experts consulted to ensure that all relevant articles had been identified. OUTCOMES: Prevention of death from breast cancer was viewed as the most important outcome; other outcomes examined included the stage of cancer detected, the rate of benign biopsy results, the number of patient visits for breast complaints, and psychological benefits and harms. VALUES: The recommendations of this report reflect the commitment of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to provide a structured, evidence-based appraisal of whether a manoeuvre should be included in the periodic health examination. BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among Canadian women, accounting for 30% of all new cancer cases each year. In 2000 an estimated 19,200 Canadian women would have been diagnosed with breast cancer, and 5500 would have died from the disease. To date, 2 large randomized controlled trials, a quasi-randomized trial, a large cohort study and several case-control studies have failed to show a benefit for regular performance of BSE or BSE education, compared with no BSE. In contrast, there is good evidence of harm from BSE instruction, including significant increases in the number of physician visits for the evaluation of benign breast lesions and significantly higher rates of benign biopsy results. RECOMMENDATIONS: Women aged 40-49 years: Because there is fair evidence of no benefit, and good evidence of harm, there is fair evidence to recommend that routine teaching of BSE be excluded from the periodic health examination of women in this age group (grade D recommendation). Women aged 50-69 years: Because there is fair evidence of no benefit, and good evidence of harm, there is fair evidence to recommend that routine teaching of BSE be excluded from the periodic health examination of women in this age group (grade D recommendation). The lack of sufficient evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of the manoeuvre in women younger than 40 years and those 70 years and older precludes making recommendations for teaching BSE to women in these age groups. The following issues may be important to consider: Women younger than 40 years: There is little evidence for effectiveness specific to this group. Because the incidence of breast cancer is low in this age group, the risk of net harm from BSE and BSE instruction is even more likely. Women 70 years and older: Although the incidence of breast cancer is high in this group, there is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation concerning BSE for women 70 years and older. Important note: Although the evidence indicates no benefit from routine instruction, some women will ask to be taught BSE. The potential benefits and harms should be discussed with the woman, and if BSE is taught, care must be taken to ensure she performs BSE in a proficient manner. VALIDATION: The findings of this analysis were reviewed through an iterative process by the members of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. The task force sent the final review and recommendations to 4 independent experts, and their feedback was incorporated in the final draft of the manuscript. SPONSORS: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care is funded through a partnership between the Provincial and Territorial Ministries of Health and Health Canada.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11450279      PMCID: PMC81191     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  68 in total

1.  Breast self-examination for the early detection of breast cancer: a USSR/WHO controlled trial in Leningrad.

Authors:  V F Semiglazov; V M Moiseenko
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Self-examination of the breast: use and effectiveness.

Authors:  W L Owen; A G Hoge; N R Asal; P L Anderson; A J Cucchiara
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 0.954

3.  Breast self-examination practice and clinical stage of breast cancer.

Authors:  H Ogawa; S Tominaga; M Yoshida; K Kubo; S Takeuchi
Journal:  Jpn J Cancer Res       Date:  1987-05

4.  [Interim results of a prospective randomized study of self-examination for early detection of breast cancer (Russia/St.Petersburg/WHO)].

Authors:  V F Semiglazov; V M Moiseenko; A G Manikhas; S A Protsenko; R S Kharikova; R T Popova; N Sh Migmanova; A A Orlov; N Iu Barash; O A Ivanova; V G Ivanov
Journal:  Vopr Onkol       Date:  1999

5.  The importance of age in screening for cancer.

Authors:  M R Law; J K Morris; N J Wald
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.136

6.  16-year mortality from breast cancer in the UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-06-05       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Breast self-examination in young women: more harm than good?

Authors:  J W Frank; V Mai
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-09-21       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Do women who undergo further investigation for breast screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? A multi-centre follow-up study comparing different breast screening result groups five months after their last breast screening appointment.

Authors:  J Brett; J Austoker; G Ong
Journal:  J Public Health Med       Date:  1998-12

9.  The effects of breast self-examination in a population-based cancer registry. A report of differences in extent of disease.

Authors:  E M Smith; T L Burns
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1985-01-15       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Breast self examination and breast cancer stage at diagnosis.

Authors:  D Mant; M P Vessey; A Neil; K McPherson; L Jones
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  58 in total

1.  Is it time to stop teaching breast self-examination?

Authors:  L Nekhlyudov; S W Fletcher
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-06-26       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Changing course in electronic seas: rapid publication of brief recommendation statements by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

Authors:  J W Feightner
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-06-26       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Ellen Warner
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  When statistics provide unsatisfying answers: revisiting the breast self-examination controversy.

Authors:  Barron H Lerner
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Tracy Highton
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Lauri Winters
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  The epistemology of epidemiology.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Tammy J Clifford; Margaret Sampson; Howard M Schachter
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Shelley Snell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Anthony B Miller; Cornelia Baines; Bart Harvey
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.