How do women experience a false-positive test result from breast screening? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.
Journal
British journal of cancer
ISSN: 1532-1827
Titre abrégé: Br J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370635
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2019
08 2019
Historique:
received:
01
03
2019
accepted:
28
06
2019
revised:
24
06
2019
pubmed:
25
7
2019
medline:
11
3
2020
entrez:
24
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This is the first review to identify, appraise and synthesise women's experiences of having a false-positive breast screening test result. We systematically searched eight databases for qualitative research reporting women's experiences of receiving a false-positive screening test result. Two reviewers independently screened articles. Eight papers reporting seven studies were included. Study quality was appraised. Data were thematically synthesised. Women passively attended screening in order to prove their perceived good health. Consequently, being recalled was unexpected, shocking and disempowering: women felt without options. They endured great uncertainty and stress and sought clarity about their health (e.g. by scrutinising the wording of recall letters and conversations with healthcare professionals). Their result was accompanied by relief and welcome feelings of certainty about their health, but some received unclear explanations of their result, contributing to lasting breast cancer-related worry and an ongoing need for further reassurance. The organisation of breast screening programmes may constrain choice for women: they became passive recipients. The way healthcare professionals verbally communicate results to women may contribute to lasting breast cancer-related worry. Women need more reassurance, emotional support and answers to their questions before and during screening assessment, and after receiving their result.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
This is the first review to identify, appraise and synthesise women's experiences of having a false-positive breast screening test result.
METHODS
We systematically searched eight databases for qualitative research reporting women's experiences of receiving a false-positive screening test result. Two reviewers independently screened articles. Eight papers reporting seven studies were included. Study quality was appraised. Data were thematically synthesised.
RESULTS
Women passively attended screening in order to prove their perceived good health. Consequently, being recalled was unexpected, shocking and disempowering: women felt without options. They endured great uncertainty and stress and sought clarity about their health (e.g. by scrutinising the wording of recall letters and conversations with healthcare professionals). Their result was accompanied by relief and welcome feelings of certainty about their health, but some received unclear explanations of their result, contributing to lasting breast cancer-related worry and an ongoing need for further reassurance.
CONCLUSION
The organisation of breast screening programmes may constrain choice for women: they became passive recipients. The way healthcare professionals verbally communicate results to women may contribute to lasting breast cancer-related worry. Women need more reassurance, emotional support and answers to their questions before and during screening assessment, and after receiving their result.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31332283
doi: 10.1038/s41416-019-0524-4
pii: 10.1038/s41416-019-0524-4
pmc: PMC6738040
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
351-358Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Références
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 04;(6):CD001877
pubmed: 23737396
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Apr 3;146(7):502-10
pubmed: 17404352
Eur J Cancer. 2001 Mar;37(4):463-9
pubmed: 11267855
Open Med. 2009;3(3):e123-30
pubmed: 21603045
Psychooncology. 2005 Nov;14(11):917-38
pubmed: 15786514
Scand J Prim Health Care. 2008;26(4):251-6
pubmed: 19034808
Health Care Women Int. 2011 Nov;32(11):1009-27
pubmed: 21978146
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jul 10;8:45
pubmed: 18616818
Evid Based Med. 2013 Apr;18(2):54-61
pubmed: 22859786
BMJ Open. 2015 Jan 23;5(1):e005855
pubmed: 25618139
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2016 Jul 01;16(16):1-22
pubmed: 27468327
Am Psychol. 2018 Jan;73(1):26-46
pubmed: 29345485
J Clin Nurs. 2014 Jul;23(13-14):2053-62
pubmed: 24313329
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:49-58
pubmed: 29247700
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Nov 27;12:181
pubmed: 23185978
J Med Screen. 1994 Jan;1(1):7-12
pubmed: 8790480
J Med Screen. 2014 Dec;21(4):194-200
pubmed: 25312639
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Apr 3;146(7):516-26
pubmed: 17404354
J Med Screen. 2013 Jun;20(2):91-8
pubmed: 24009091
J Public Health Med. 2001 Dec;23(4):292-300
pubmed: 11873891
Womens Health Issues. 2015 Mar-Apr;25(2):128-33
pubmed: 25648490
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Nov 17;151(10):727-37, W237-42
pubmed: 19920273
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:35-38
pubmed: 29242094
J Public Health Med. 1998 Dec;20(4):396-403
pubmed: 9923945
Med Decis Making. 2008 Nov-Dec;28(6):850-65
pubmed: 19015287
J Med Screen. 1997;4(3):158-68
pubmed: 9368874
Psychooncology. 2010 Oct;19(10):1026-34
pubmed: 20882572
Women Health. 2001;33(3-4):1-14
pubmed: 11527098
Br J Health Psychol. 2015 Nov;20(4):792-806
pubmed: 25944747
J Med Screen. 2017 Sep;24(3):163-165
pubmed: 28756764
Lancet. 2012 Nov 17;380(9855):1778-86
pubmed: 23117178