Literature DB >> 2803955

Psychiatric morbidity associated with screening for breast cancer.

R Ellman1, N Angeli, A Christians, S Moss, J Chamberlain, P Maguire.   

Abstract

The 28-item GHQ was used to assess psychiatric morbidity in 302 women attending for routine breast cancer screening, 300 women attending for further investigation of a positive screening result and 150 women referred for investigation of breast symptoms. The GHQ-28 was administered on arrival at the relevant clinic and three months later. Medical records were used to determine the outcome of the clinic attendance. Women were classified into routinely screened women, women with false positive screening results, symptomatic women with a benign diagnosis, newly diagnosed cancer patients and previously treated cancer patients. When tested on arrival at the clinic, 25% of routinely screened, 30% of women with false positive results and 35% of symptomatic women with benign conditions were probable cases of psychiatric morbidity. The only statistically significant difference was between the routinely screened and symptomatic benign groups. Levels of anxiety were significantly higher in those with false positive results and in the symptomatic benign group than in the routinely screened. Three months later the prevalence of probable psychiatric morbidity had fallen to 19% in both the routinely screened and those with false positive results but remained significantly higher in the symptomatic benign group (31%). Probable cases of psychiatric morbidity among newly detected cancer patients rose from 34 to 46% over the 3-month period. Among women who had had breast cancer diagnosed in the past prevalence remained at 21%. The prevalence of probable psychiatric morbidity in screened women is similar to that in the general population. Among women referred for further investigation because of a false positive screening result prevalence was only slightly increased and there was no evidence of a sustained increase in anxiety. Provided that delays are kept to a minimum and that women are kept informed, a breast cancer screening programme does not increase psychiatric morbidity. Further research is required in cancer patients to determine whether those diagnosed in asymptomatic women have a higher and more sustained degree of psychiatric morbidity than those diagnosed in women who are aware of symptoms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2803955      PMCID: PMC2247323          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1989.359

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  4 in total

1.  Explaining attendance at a breast-screening clinic.

Authors:  M W Calnan; S Moss; J Chamberlain
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  1985-03

2.  Psychiatric morbidity after screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  C Dean; M M Roberts; K French; S Robinson
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Breast cancer screening: a different look at the evidence.

Authors:  C J Wright
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 3.982

4.  Contrasting demographic patterns of minor psychiatric morbidity in general practice and the community.

Authors:  R A Finlay-Jones; P W Burvill
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  1978-08       Impact factor: 7.723

  4 in total
  30 in total

Review 1.  Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40-49 years at average risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  J Ringash
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-02-20       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Specificity of screening in United Kingdom trial of early detection of breast cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-02-08

3.  Immediate reporting of fine needle aspiration of breast lesions.

Authors:  J M Dixon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-02-23

4.  Screening of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a pragmatic approach.

Authors:  C Kyriakides; J Byrne; S Green; N R Hulton
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.891

5.  Breast screening: a subject for debate.

Authors:  J Austoker; D Sharp
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  The impact of a suspicious prostate biopsy on patients' psychological, socio-behavioral, and medical care outcomes.

Authors:  Floyd J Fowler; Michael J Barry; Beth Walker-Corkery; Jean-Francois Caubet; David W Bates; Jeong Min Lee; Alison Hauser; Mary McNaughton-Collins
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey.

Authors:  L M Schwartz; S Woloshin; H C Sox; B Fischhoff; H G Welch
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-17

8.  Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of two view versus one view procedures in London.

Authors:  S Bryan; J Brown; R Warren
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 3.710

9.  One-stop diagnosis for symptomatic breast disease.

Authors:  G P Gui; W H Allum; N M Perry; C A Wells; O M Curling; A McLean; R Oommen; R Carpenter
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  Classification of findings in mammography screening--a method to minimise recall anxiety?

Authors:  M Pamilo; J Lönnqvist; A Halttunen; M Soiva; I Suramo
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 3.710

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.