Literature DB >> 16243291

Adverse psychological outcomes in colorectal cancer screening: does health anxiety play a role?

A Miles1, J Wardle.   

Abstract

People who are anxious about their health are more likely to misinterpret health information as personally threatening and less likely to be reassured by medical investigations that show they are free from disease. Consequently, health anxious people would be expected to react more adversely to cancer screening, but this possibility has rarely been explored. The moderating role of health anxiety on the psychological impact of participating in colorectal cancer screening was examined among a sub-sample of 3535 participants in a large, community-based trial of colorectal cancer screening in the UK. The screening modality was flexible sigmoidoscopy, which examines the bowel for pre-cancerous polyps. It was predicted that health anxiety would be associated with more worry about cancer before screening, a greater increase in worry if polyps were detected, and less reassurance after a clear result. As expected, health anxious participants were more anxious and more worried about bowel cancer both before and after screening. However, they experienced greater reductions in anxiety and worry about cancer following the examination. They reported lower levels of reassurance following screening, but also expressed more positive reactions to the experience. The positive psychological benefits of attending medical investigations should be examined in future work, because this may go some way towards explaining why health anxious people repeatedly seek medical interventions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16243291     DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2005.08.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Ther        ISSN: 0005-7967


  10 in total

1.  A qualitative study of lung cancer risk perceptions and smoking beliefs among national lung screening trial participants.

Authors:  Elyse R Park; Joanna M Streck; Ilana F Gareen; Jamie S Ostroff; Kelly A Hyland; Nancy A Rigotti; Hannah Pajolek; Mark Nichter
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 4.244

2.  The analysis of a large Danish family supports the presence of a susceptibility locus for adenoma and colorectal cancer on chromosome 11q24.

Authors:  Laura Aviaja Rudkjøbing; Hans Eiberg; Hanne Birte Mikkelsen; Marie Louise Mølgaard Binderup; Marie Luise Bisgaard
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  Anxiety Associated with Colonoscopy and Flexible Sigmoidoscopy: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Chengyue Yang; Vaelan Sriranjan; Ahmed M Abou-Setta; William Poluha; John R Walker; Harminder Singh
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Do no harm: no psychological harm from colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Benedicte Kirkøen; Paula Berstad; Edoardo Botteri; Tone Lise Åvitsland; Alvilde Maria Ossum; Thomas de Lange; Geir Hoff; Tomm Bernklev
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Psychological effects of colorectal cancer screening: Participants vs individuals not invited.

Authors:  Benedicte Kirkøen; Paula Berstad; Edoardo Botteri; Linn Bernklev; Badboni El-Safadi; Geir Hoff; Thomas de Lange; Tomm Bernklev
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Understanding of a negative bowel screening result and potential impact on future symptom appraisal and help-seeking behaviour: a focus group study.

Authors:  Karen N Barnett; David Weller; Steve Smith; Sheina Orbell; Peter Vedsted; Robert J C Steele; Jane W Melia; Sue M Moss; Julietta Patnick; Christine Campbell
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Do men regret prostate biopsy: Results from the PiCTure study.

Authors:  Catherine Coyle; Eileen Morgan; Frances J Drummond; Linda Sharp; Anna Gavin
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Psychosocial Factors Associated With Withdrawal From the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening After 1 Episode of Repeat Screening.

Authors:  Valerie Jenkins; Lesley Fallowfield; Carolyn Langridge; Jessica Barrett; Andy Ryan; Ian Jacobs; Justine Kilkerr; Usha Menon; Vernon Farewell
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.437

9.  Gender differences in attitudes impeding colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Paul Ritvo; Ronald E Myers; Lawrence Paszat; Mardie Serenity; Daniel F Perez; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Patient-reported impacts of a conservative management programme for the clinically inapparent adrenal mass.

Authors:  Andreas Muth; Charles Taft; Lilian Hammarstedt; Lena Björneld; Mikael Hellström; Bo Wängberg
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 3.633

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.