Literature DB >> 8880840

Pain during mammography: characteristics and relationship to demographic and medical variables.

P J Kornguth1, F J Keefe, M R Conaway.   

Abstract

Reports of pain during mammography show that there is great variability in both the incidence of reported pain (0.2-62%) and the intensity of that pain. Much of that variability may be due to the measures used to rate mammography pain. This is the first study that has examined the incidence, quality and intensity of mammography pain using a variety of pain measures. A sample of 119 women undergoing screening mammography was studied using four pain scales, three well-validated measures frequently used in the pain research literature as well as a pain/discomfort measure frequently reported in the radiology literature. A large proportion (up to 91%) of women report having some degree of pain during mammography. The intensity of that pain was typically in the low to moderate range, but a small proportion of women (< 15%) reported intense pain. The incidence of reported pain was related to the pain measure used. Pain measures that provided a woman with many options for reporting pain were associated with a higher incidence of pain than a scale that provided only one or two options. Thus, some of the variability in reported incidence of pain during mammography can be explained by the pain scale used in the study. Demographic and medical variables could explain 18-20% of the variance in mammography pain. Two of the variables that were shown to consistently predict a painful mammographic experience were (1) average pain at the last mammogram and (2) breast density. This study demonstrated that the pain measure selected for use in a particular study may depend on the population being studied. A college education was found to be an important predictor of pain scores on the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Thus, this pain measure may be of limited usefulness in studying a population of women with little formal education.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8880840     DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(96)03057-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  9 in total

Review 1.  Clinical practice. Mammographic screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  Suzanne W Fletcher; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-04-24       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Self-compression Technique vs Standard Compression in Mammography: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Philippe Henrot; Martine Boisserie-Lacroix; Véronique Boute; Philippe Troufléau; Bruno Boyer; Grégory Lesanne; Véronique Gillon; Emmanuel Desandes; Edith Netter; Maryam Saadate; Anne Tardivon; Christine Grentzinger; Julia Salleron; Guillaume Oldrini
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

3.  Pain and discomfort associated with mammography among urban low-income African-American women.

Authors:  Mia A Papas; Ann C Klassen
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2005-08

Review 4.  Screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Katrina Armstrong; Constance D Lehman; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Toxicity of topical lidocaine applied to the breasts to reduce discomfort during screening mammography.

Authors:  Colleen K Lambertz; Christopher J Johnson; Paul G Montgomery; James R Maxwell; Stefanie J Fry
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-04

6.  Pain-preventing strategies in mammography: an observational study of simultaneously recorded pain and breast mechanics throughout the entire breast compression cycle.

Authors:  Jerry E de Groot; Mireille J M Broeders; Cornelis A Grimbergen; Gerard J den Heeten
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2015-03-15       Impact factor: 2.809

7.  Experiences of Women Who Refuse Recall for Further Investigation of Abnormal Screening Mammography: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Wei-Ying Sung; Hui-Chuan Yang; I-Chen Liao; Yu-Ting Su; Fu-Husan Chen; Shu-Ling Chen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  A New Technical Mode in Mammography: Self-Compression Improves Satisfaction.

Authors:  Sıla Ulus; Özge Kovan; Aydan Arslan; Pınar Elpen; Erkin Arıbal
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2019-06-17

9.  Patient comfort from the technologist perspective: factors to consider in mammographic imaging.

Authors:  Christina C Mendat; Dave Mislan; Lisa Hession-Kunz
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2017-05-18
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.