OBJECTIVE: To investigate the possible negative psychological impact of screening for prostate cancer with special focus on the impact of false positive and true positive test results. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: As part of an early detection study for prostate cancer psychological and psychophysiological reactions to various phases of the diagnostic procedures were examined in 2400 randomly selected men divided into various groups. Their psychophysiological reactions were assessed by measurements of serum cortisol and their psychological reactions by questionnaires directed at determining emotional states and sleep disturbance. In a stratified sample of the population (100 men) measurements were made at the time of the screening examination and again 2 weeks later. In patients undergoing biopsy (307 men) measurements were made 2 weeks after screening, but before they were informed of the biopsy results, and again 4 and 16 weeks after screening. RESULTS: Serum cortisol levels at the screening examination were higher than corresponding levels of a comparable sample of Swedish men during normal daily activity, indicating that an invitation to examination for prostate cancer per se might create emotional stress. Two weeks after the screening the elevated levels had decreased to normal. The highest cortisol levels were found in men who had undergone biopsy, immediately before they were informed of the results 2 weeks after screening. After they were informed, cortisol levels fell, regardless of the results of the biopsy. The patterns of emotional state and sleep disturbance were similar except that sleep disturbance was delayed. CONCLUSION: In screening programmes for prostate cancer it is important to define clearly the high-risk groups to minimize the risk of adverse psychological reactions in those subjects with a low risk of having the disease. The results also emphasize the need to reduce the number of false positive results by choosing diagnostic tests of high specificity. The interval between a test and informing the subject of the results should be minimized to decrease the duration of the increased emotional stress.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the possible negative psychological impact of screening for prostate cancer with special focus on the impact of false positive and true positive test results. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: As part of an early detection study for prostate cancer psychological and psychophysiological reactions to various phases of the diagnostic procedures were examined in 2400 randomly selected men divided into various groups. Their psychophysiological reactions were assessed by measurements of serum cortisol and their psychological reactions by questionnaires directed at determining emotional states and sleep disturbance. In a stratified sample of the population (100 men) measurements were made at the time of the screening examination and again 2 weeks later. In patients undergoing biopsy (307 men) measurements were made 2 weeks after screening, but before they were informed of the biopsy results, and again 4 and 16 weeks after screening. RESULTS: Serum cortisol levels at the screening examination were higher than corresponding levels of a comparable sample of Swedish men during normal daily activity, indicating that an invitation to examination for prostate cancer per se might create emotional stress. Two weeks after the screening the elevated levels had decreased to normal. The highest cortisol levels were found in men who had undergone biopsy, immediately before they were informed of the results 2 weeks after screening. After they were informed, cortisol levels fell, regardless of the results of the biopsy. The patterns of emotional state and sleep disturbance were similar except that sleep disturbance was delayed. CONCLUSION: In screening programmes for prostate cancer it is important to define clearly the high-risk groups to minimize the risk of adverse psychological reactions in those subjects with a low risk of having the disease. The results also emphasize the need to reduce the number of false positive results by choosing diagnostic tests of high specificity. The interval between a test and informing the subject of the results should be minimized to decrease the duration of the increased emotional stress.
Authors: C Börgermann; M Sieverding; P Fornara; M Graefen; P Hammerer; A Semjonow; F Schröder; H Rübben Journal: Urologe A Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 0.639
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
Authors: David A Katz; David F Jarrard; Colleen A McHorney; Stephen L Hillis; Donald A Wiebe; Dennis G Fryback Journal: Urology Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: R C Macefield; C Metcalfe; J A Lane; J L Donovan; K N L Avery; J M Blazeby; L Down; D E Neal; F C Hamdy; K Vedhara Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-04-06 Impact factor: 7.640