Literature DB >> 14626300

Does biopsy, aspiration or six-month follow-up of a false-positive mammogram reduce future screening or have large psychosocial effects?

Beverly V Currence1, Etta D Pisano, Jo Anne Earp, Alexis Moore, Yen-Feng Chiu, Marylee E Brown, Kerrie L Kurgat.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: To determine the differences in the psychosocial effects and future mammography screening behavior between women who had an abnormal mammogram followed either by percutaneous or open surgical breast biopsy or cyst aspiration, or by short-term follow-up mammography to provide insight to radiologists making decisions regarding work-up.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A structured interview was administered to women who recently had abnormal mammograms, leading to biopsy or aspiration (170 cases), or short-term follow-up (176 controls), by telephone within a month of the eligibility event and again approximately 15 months later. Information was collected on perceived pain/discomfort, interactions with medical staff, emotional impact, general breast cancer knowledge, patient attitude towards early diagnosis of breast cancer, perceived risk, previous and intended screening behavior, and subjective health status. Wilcoxon rank sum statistical test was used to compare the two groups at the time of both interviews.
RESULTS: Cases and controls had similar demographics. There were no significant differences in the examined psychosocial effects and reported intention to undergo future screening mammography between cases and controls. The overwhelming majority of both cases and controls both reported intention to and underwent routine screening 15 months after the eligibility event.
CONCLUSION: Undergoing a biopsy, cyst aspiration, or 6-month follow-up after a positive mammogram does not have large psychosocial effects, nor does it deter women from undergoing screening mammography in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14626300     DOI: 10.1016/s1076-6332(03)00382-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  4 in total

1.  Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms.

Authors:  Anna N A Tosteson; Dennis G Fryback; Cristina S Hammond; Lucy G Hanna; Margaret R Grove; Mary Brown; Qianfei Wang; Karen Lindfors; Etta D Pisano
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 21.873

2.  False-positive results in the randomized controlled trial of mammographic screening from age 40 ("Age" trial).

Authors:  Louise E Johns; Sue M Moss
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Initial development of the Temporary Utilities Index: a multiattribute system for classifying the functional health impact of diagnostic testing.

Authors:  J Shannon Swan; Jun Ying; James Stahl; Chung Yin Kong; Beverly Moy; Jessica Roy; Elkan Halpern
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 4.  Guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures.

Authors:  Matthew Wallis; Anne Tardivon; Anne Tarvidon; Thomas Helbich; Ingrid Schreer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 7.034

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.