Literature DB >> 12023127

Adverse psychological effects in women attending a second-stage breast cancer screening.

Bonifacio Sandin1, Paloma Chorot, Rosa M Valiente, Lourdes Lostao, Miguel A Santed.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the emotional and psychopathological impact associated with a second-stage screening for breast cancer.
METHOD: We used a short-term longitudinal design. Interviews were conducted with 1195 women of 45-65 years old in three temporal conditions (premammogram, postmammogram, and follow-up). Participants included women attending for regular breast cancer screening who were recalled for a further mammogram (i.e., second-stage breast cancer screening) and women who were not recalled. Affective-cognitive concerns about cancer (worry, fear, and perceived vulnerability) were rated using a 10-point Likert scale. Psychopathology was assessed using the Hopkins Symptom Check List-Revised (SCL-90-R).
RESULTS: Women attending the second-stage screening exhibited significantly higher levels of breast cancer worries, fears, and beliefs than women attending for routine screening before obtaining the results of the mammogram. This affective-emotional impact disappeared quickly and was not relevant 2 months following the mammogram. Despite the fact that levels of psychopathological symptoms were higher in the premammogram condition, there were no differences between groups on these measures.
CONCLUSION: These results provide support for the hypothesis that women recalled for further mammograms tend to experience high levels of affective-cognitive distress but not psychopathological symptoms. Moreover, results do not sustain the prediction that this psychological impact persists beyond receipt of a negative result. Some recommendations to reduce these psychological side effects are suggested.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12023127     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3999(01)00227-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychosom Res        ISSN: 0022-3999            Impact factor:   3.006


  9 in total

1.  Perspectives on mammography after receipt of secondary screening owing to a false positive.

Authors:  Maria D Thomson; Laura A Siminoff
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-01-31

2.  The demographic, system, and psychosocial origins of mammographic screening disparities: prediction of initiation versus maintenance screening among immigrant and non-immigrant women.

Authors:  Nathan S Consedine
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2012-08

3.  Recall Rate Reduction with Tomosynthesis During Baseline Screening Examinations: An Assessment From a Prospective Trial.

Authors:  Jules H Sumkin; Marie A Ganott; Denise M Chough; Victor J Catullo; Margarita L Zuley; Dilip D Shinde; Christiane M Hakim; Andriy I Bandos; David Gur
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  A multisite telemammography system for remote management of screening mammography: an assessment of technical, operational, and clinical issues.

Authors:  Joseph K Leader; Christiane M Hakim; Marie A Ganott; Denise M Chough; Luisa P Wallace; Ronald J Clearfield; Ronald L Perrin; John M Drescher; Glenn S Maitz; Jules H Sumkin; David Gur
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Clinical, demographic, and situational factors linked to distress associated with benign breast biopsy.

Authors:  Rachel F Steffens; Heather R Wright; Molly Y Hester; Michael A Andrykowski
Journal:  J Psychosoc Oncol       Date:  2011

6.  FIT false-positives in colorectal cancer screening experience psychological distress up to 6 weeks after colonoscopy.

Authors:  M J Denters; M Deutekom; M L Essink-Bot; P M Bossuyt; P Fockens; E Dekker
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Online support: Impact on anxiety in women who experience an abnormal screening mammogram.

Authors:  Eniola T Obadina; Lori L Dubenske; Helene E McDowell; Amy K Atwood; Deborah K Mayer; Ryan W Woods; David H Gustafson; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 4.380

8.  Experiences of Women Who Refuse Recall for Further Investigation of Abnormal Screening Mammography: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Wei-Ying Sung; Hui-Chuan Yang; I-Chen Liao; Yu-Ting Su; Fu-Husan Chen; Shu-Ling Chen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 9.  Scanxiety: a scoping review about scan-associated anxiety.

Authors:  Kim Tam Bui; Roger Liang; Belinda E Kiely; Chris Brown; Haryana M Dhillon; Prunella Blinman
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.