Psychological and Behavioral Implications of Abnormal Mammograms
Objective: To evaluate women's psychological responses to abnormal mammograms and the effect on mammography adherence. To identify psychological responses and other factors that predict mammography adherence in women with normal or abnormal mammograms.
Design: Survey study with prospective analysis of factors associated with mammography adherence.
Setting: Health Maintenance Organization of Pennsylvania and New Jersey (HMO PA/NJ).
Patients: Study patients, members of HMO PA/NJ who were 50 years of age or older, and who had had mammography done 3 months earlier, included women with normal mammograms (n = 121), women with low-suspicion mammograms (n = 119), and women with high-suspicion mammograms (n = 68), but not women with breast cancer.
Measurements: Psychological responses 3 months after mammography and adherence to subsequent annual mammography were assessed.
Main Results: Women with high-suspicion mammograms had substantial mammography-related anxiety (47%) and worries about breast cancer (41%). Such worries affected the moods (26%) and daily functioning (17%) of these women, despite diagnostic evaluation excluding malignancy. For each variable, a consistent trend (P > 0.05) was seen with degree of mammogram abnormality. Sixty-eight percent of women with normal results, 78% of women with low-suspicion results, and 74% of women with high-suspicion results obtained their subsequent annual mammograms (P > 0.05). The number of previous mammograms (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.6 to 6.2) and the effect of the previous results on concerns about breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.5; CI, 0.2 to 1.0) were independent predictors of adherence in logistic regression analyses (P < 0.05).
Conclusions: A substantial proportion of women with suspicious mammograms have psychological difficulties, even after learning that they do not have cancer. Such sequelae do not appear to interfere with subsequent adherence.
Lerman C, Rimer B, Trock B, Balshem A, and Engstrom P. Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Prev Med. 1990;19:279-90. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Rimer B, Keintz M, Kessler H, Engstrom P, and Rosan J. Why women resist screening mammography: patient-related barriers. Radiology. 1989;172:243-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Winchester D, Lasky H, Sylvester J, and Maher M. A television-promoted mammography screening pilot project in the Chicago metropolitan area. CA. 1988;38:291-309. Google Scholar
Dawson Dand Thompson G. Breast Cancer Risk Factors and Screening: United States, 1987. Hyattsville, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics; 1990 DHHS publication (PHS) no. 90-1500. Google Scholar
Baker L. Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: Five-year Summary Report. New York: American Cancer Society, Inc.; 1982. Google Scholar
Eddy D, Hasselblad V, McGivney W, and Hendee W. The value of mammography screening in women under age 50 years. JAMA. 1988;259:1512-9. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Moskowitz M. Costs of screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 1987;25:1031-7. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Macdonald L, Sackett D, Haynes R, and Taylor D. Labelling in hypertension: a review of the behavioural and psychological consequences. J Chronic Dis. 1984;37:933-42. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Reelick N, de Haes W, and Schuurman J. Psychological side-effects of the mass screening on cervical cancer. Soc Sci Med. 1984;18:1089-93. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Alagna S, Morokoff P, Bevett J, and Reddy D. Performance of breast self-examination by women at high risk for breast cancer. Women Health. 1987;12:29-46. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Greenwald H, Becker S, and Nevitt M. Delay and noncompliance in cancer detection: a behavioral perspective for health planners. Mil-bank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1978;56:212-30. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer B, Jepson C, Boyce A, and Brody D. Psychological side-effects of breast cancer screening. Health Psychol. 1991 [In press]. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Lerman C, Rimer B, and Engstrom P. Reducing avoidable cancer mortality through prevention and early detection regimens. Cancer Res. 1989;49:4955-62. MedlineGoogle Scholar
Dupont Wand Page D. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:146-51. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson W, Thomas D, Hamlin W, Roth G, Peterson A, and Williams B. Risk of breast cancer in women with benign breast disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1980;65:13-20. MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 16. . Screening mammography: a missed clinical opportunity? Results of the NCI Breast Cancer Screening Consortium and National Health Interview Survey Studies. JAMA. 1990;264:54-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Kirscht J. Preventive health behavior: a review of research and issues. Health Psychol. 1983;2:227-301. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstock I. The health belief model: explaining health behavior through expectancies. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1990:39-62. Google Scholar
King E, Rimer B, Trock B, Balshem A, and Engstrom P. How valid are mammography self-reports? Am J Public Health. 1990;80:1386-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Kleinbaum D, Kupper L, and Morgenstern H. Epidemiologic Research: Principles and Quantitative Methods. Belmont, California: Lifetime Learning Publications; 1982. Google Scholar
Kegeles S, Kirscht J, and Haefner D. Survey of beliefs about cancer detection and taking Papanicolaou tests. Public Health Rep. 1965;80:815-23. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Calnan M. The health belief model and participation in programmes for the early detection of breast cancer: a comparative analysis. Soc Sci Med. 1984;19:823-30. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Meyerowitz B, Sullivan C, and Premeau C. Reactions of asbestos-exposed workers to notification and screening. Am J Ind Med. 1989;15:463-75. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
Schulte Pand Ringen K. Notification of workers at high risk: an emerging public health problem. Am J Public Health. 1984;74:485-91. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon.
Author, Article, and Disclosure Information
From the Fox Chase Cancer Center, Cheltenham, Pennsylvania. For current author addresses, see end of text.