Literature DB >> 25964402

Diagnostic invasiveness and psychosocial consequences of false-positive mammography.

Bruno Heleno1, Volkert Dirk Siersma2, John Brodersen2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to assess whether women with false-positive mammography have worse psychosocial consequences if managed with a workup that involves a biopsy (invasive group) than if managed with only additional imaging (noninvasive group).
METHODS: We performed subgroup analysis of a cohort study of 454 women with abnormal screening mammography and 908 matched control women with normal results. Using a condition-specific questionnaire (Consequences of Screening in Breast Cancer), we assessed 12 psychosocial consequences at 5 time points (0, 1, 6, 18, and 36 months after final diagnosis) and compared the 2 groups of women with false-positives (invasive and noninvasive management groups).
RESULTS: Among the 252 women with false-positive mammography eligible for this study, psychosocial consequences were similar for those managed invasively and those managed noninvasively during the 36 months of follow-up. In 60 comparisons (12 scales and 5 time points), differences between the groups were never statistically significant (P <.01) and the point estimates for the differences were always close to zero. The psychosocial consequences of women with false-positive results, regardless of management, fell between those of women with normal mammography and those of women determined to have breast cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that use of more invasive diagnostics was associated with worse psychosocial consequences. It is therefore reasonable to pool subgroups of women with false-positives in a single analysis. The invasiveness of subsequent diagnostic procedures does not help to identify women at higher risk for adverse psychosocial consequences of false-positive mammography.
© 2015 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biopsy; biopsy/adverse effects; breast cancer; false-positive reactions/adverse effects; fine-needle/adverse effects; mammography/adverse effects; mass screening

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25964402      PMCID: PMC4427419          DOI: 10.1370/afm.1762

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Fam Med        ISSN: 1544-1709            Impact factor:   5.166


  23 in total

Review 1.  Breast cancer worry in further examination of mammography screening--a systematic review.

Authors:  Eija Metsälä; Arja Pajukari; Arja R Aro
Journal:  Scand J Caring Sci       Date:  2011-12-14

2.  Validation of a condition-specific measure for women having an abnormal screening mammography.

Authors:  John Brodersen; Hanne Thorsen; Svend Kreiner
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 3.  Mammography screening from the perspective of quality of life: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Bjørg Hafslund; Monica W Nortvedt
Journal:  Scand J Caring Sci       Date:  2009-01-08

4.  The psychological impact of a false-positive screening mammogram in Barcelona.

Authors:  Rebecca Espasa; Cristiane Murta-Nascimento; Ramón Bayés; Maria Sala; Montserrat Casamitjana; Francesc Macià; Xavier Castells
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 5.  Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Talya Salz; Sarah E Lillie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 6.  The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review.

Authors:  J Brett; C Bankhead; B Henderson; E Watson; J Austoker
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.894

7.  Meta-analyses of the effect of false-positive mammograms on generic and specific psychosocial outcomes.

Authors:  Talya Salz; Alice R Richman; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.894

8.  Women's experience with breast biopsy.

Authors:  Sharon L Chappy
Journal:  AORN J       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 0.676

9.  Consequences of Screening in Breast Cancer (COS-BC): development of a questionnaire.

Authors:  John Brodersen; Hanne Thorsen
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.581

10.  Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography.

Authors:  John Brodersen; Volkert Dirk Siersma
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

View more
  2 in total

1.  The mammography debate, round two: science, smoke and mirrors.

Authors:  C Kaniklidis
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  In This Issue: A Cry for Balance.

Authors:  Kurt C Stange
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.