1
|
Smith J, Cvejic E, Houssami N, Schonberg MA, Vincent W, Naganathan V, Jansen J, Dodd RH, Wallis K, McCaffery KJ. Randomized Trial of Information for Older Women About Cessation of Breast Cancer Screening Invitations. J Gen Intern Med 2024; 39:1332-1341. [PMID: 38409512 PMCID: PMC11169431 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-024-08656-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2024] [Indexed: 02/28/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Older women receive no information about why Australia's breast screening program (BreastScreen) invitations cease after 74 years. We tested how providing older women with the rationale for breast screening cessation impacted informed choice (adequate knowledge; screening attitudes aligned with intention). METHODS In a three-arm online randomized trial, eligible participants were females aged 70-74 years who had recently participated in breast screening (within 5 years), without personal breast cancer history, recruited through Qualtrics. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they received a BreastScreen letter reporting no abnormalities on their mammogram. They were randomized to receive the letter: (1) without any rationale for screening cessation (control); (2) with screening cessation rationale in printed-text form (e.g., downsides of screening outweigh the benefits after age 74); or (3) with screening cessation rationale presented in an animation video form. The primary outcome was informed choice about continuing/stopping breast screening beyond 74 years. RESULTS A total of 376 participant responses were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 122), intervention arm participants (text [n = 132] or animation [n = 122]) were more likely to make an informed choice (control 18.0%; text 32.6%, p = .010; animation 40.5%, p < .001). Intervention arm participants had more adequate knowledge (control 23.8%; text 59.8%, p < .001; animation 68.9%, p < .001), lower screening intentions (control 17.2%; text 36.4%, p < .001; animation 49.2%, p < .001), and fewer positive screening attitudes regarding screening for themselves in the animation arm, but not in the text arm (control 65.6%; text 51.5%, p = .023; animation 40.2%, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS Providing information to older women about the rationale for breast cancer screening cessation increased informed decision-making in a hypothetical scenario. This study is an important first step in improving messaging provided by national cancer screening providers direct to older adults. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different elements of the intervention and the impact of providing this information in clinical practice, with more diverse samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION ANZCTRN12623000033640.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenna Smith
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Erin Cvejic
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with the Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Mara A Schonberg
- Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Wendy Vincent
- BreastScreen NSW, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Vasi Naganathan
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Concord Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Department of Geriatric Medicine, Centre for Education and Research On Ageing, Concord Hospital, Concord, NSW, Australia
| | - Jesse Jansen
- Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Rachael H Dodd
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with the Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Katharine Wallis
- General Practice Clinical Unit, Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Kirsten J McCaffery
- Edward Ford Building (A27), The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dickson-Swift V, Adams J, Spelten E, Blackberry I, Wilson C, Yuen E. Breast cancer screening motivation and behaviours of women aged over 75 years. Psychooncology 2024; 33:e6268. [PMID: 38110243 DOI: 10.1002/pon.6268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2023] [Revised: 11/29/2023] [Accepted: 11/29/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In Australia, breast screening is offered free every two years to women aged 50-74 years. Women aged ≥75 are eligible to receive a free mammogram but do not receive an invitation. This study aimed to explore the motivations and behaviours of women living in Australia aged ≥75 years regarding ongoing breast cancer screening given the public health guidance. METHODS Sixty women aged ≥75 were recruited from metropolitan, regional, and rural areas across Australia to participate in a descriptive qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were used to seek reflection on women's experience of screening, any advice they had received about screening beyond 75, their understanding of the value of screening and their intention to participate in the future. Thematic analysis of transcripts led to the development of themes. RESULTS Themes resulting from the study included: reasons to continue and discontinue screening, importance of inclusivity in the health system and availability of information. Regular screeners overwhelmingly wished to continue screening and had strong beliefs in the benefits of screening. Women received limited information about the benefits or harms of screening beyond age 75 and very few had discussed screening with their Primary Healthcare Provider. No longer receiving an invitation to attend screening impacted many women's decision-making. CONCLUSION More information via structured discussion with health professionals is required to inform women about the risks and benefits of ongoing screening. No longer being invited to attend screening left many women feeling confused and for some this led to feelings of discrimination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Virginia Dickson-Swift
- Violet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - Joanne Adams
- Violet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - Evelien Spelten
- Violet Vines Marshman Centre for Rural Health Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - Irene Blackberry
- John Richards Centre for Rural Ageing Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Wodonga, Victoria, Australia
| | - Carlene Wilson
- Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- La Trobe University, School of Psychology and Public Health, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
| | - Eva Yuen
- Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- La Trobe University, School of Psychology and Public Health, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
- Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
- Centre for Quality and Patient Safety - Monash Health Partnership, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Smith J, Dodd RH, Naganathan V, Cvejic E, Jansen J, Wallis K, McCaffery KJ. Screening for cancer beyond recommended upper age limits: views and experiences of older people. Age Ageing 2023; 52:afad196. [PMID: 37930739 DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afad196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 11/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Internationally, screening programmes and clinical practice guidelines recommend when older adults should stop cancer screening using upper age limits, but it is unknown how older adults view these recommendations. OBJECTIVE To examine older adults' views and experiences about continuing or stopping cancer screening beyond the recommended upper age limit for breast, cervical, prostate and bowel cancer. DESIGN Qualitative, semi-structured interviews. SETTING Australia, telephone. SUBJECTS A total of 29 community-dwelling older adults (≥70-years); recruited from organisation newsletters, mailing lists and Facebook advertisements. METHODS Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using Framework Analysis. RESULTS Firstly, older adults were on a spectrum between trusting recommendations and actively deciding about cancer screening, with some who were uncertain. Secondly, participants reported limited in-depth discussions with health professionals about cancer screening. In primary care, discussions were focused on checking they were up to date with screening or going over results. Discussions mostly only occurred if older adults initiated themselves. Finally, participants had a socially- and self-constructed understanding of screening recommendations and potential outcomes. Perceived reasons for upper age limits were cost, reduced cancer risk or ageism. Risks of screening were understood in relation to their own social experiences (e.g. shared stories about friends with adverse outcomes of cancer treatment or conversations with friends/family about controversy around prostate screening). CONCLUSIONS Direct-to-patient information and clinician support may help improve communication about the changing benefit to harm ratio of cancer screening with increasing age and increase understanding about the rationale for an upper age limit for cancer screening programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenna Smith
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rachael H Dodd
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Vasi Naganathan
- Centre for Education and Research on Ageing, Department of Geriatric Medicine, Concord Repatriation Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Concord Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Erin Cvejic
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jesse Jansen
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- School for Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Katharine Wallis
- General Practice Clinical Unit, The University of Queensland, Queensland, QLD, Australia
| | - Kirsten J McCaffery
- Wiser Healthcare, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gram EG, Siersma V, Brodersen JB. Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography: a cohort study with follow-up of 12-14 years in Denmark. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e072188. [PMID: 37185642 PMCID: PMC10151842 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the long-term psychosocial consequences of mammography screening among women with breast cancer, normal results and false-positive results. DESIGN A matched cohort study with follow-up of 12-14 years. SETTING Denmark from 2004 to 2019. PARTICIPANTS 1170 women who participated in the Danish mammography screening programme in 2004-2005. INTERVENTION Mammography screening for women aged 50-69 years. OUTCOME MEASURES We assessed the psychosocial consequences with the Consequences Of Screening-Breast Cancer, a condition-specific questionnaire that is psychometrically validated and encompasses 14 psychosocial dimensions. RESULTS Across all 14 psychosocial outcomes, women with false-positive results averagely reported higher psychosocial consequences compared with women with normal findings. Mean differences were statistically insignificant except for the existential values scale: 0.61 (95% CI (0.15 to 1.06), p=0.009). Additionally, women with false-positive results and women diagnosed with breast cancer were affected in a dose-response manner, where women diagnosed with breast cancer were more affected than women with false-positive results. CONCLUSION Our study suggests that a false-positive mammogram is associated with increased psychosocial consequences 12-14 years after the screening. This study adds to the harms of mammography screening. The findings should be used to inform decision-making among the invited women and political and governmental decisions about mammography screening programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Grundtvig Gram
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Primary Health Care Research Unit, Region Zealand, Denmark
| | - Volkert Siersma
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - John Brandt Brodersen
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Primary Health Care Research Unit, Region Zealand, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gram EG, Jønsson ABR, Brodersen JB, Damhus CS. Questioning 'Informed Choice' in Medical Screening: The Role of Neoliberal Rhetoric, Culture, and Social Context. Healthcare (Basel) 2023; 11:healthcare11091230. [PMID: 37174772 PMCID: PMC10178002 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11091230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Revised: 04/22/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Participation in medical screening programs is presented as a voluntary decision that should be based on an informed choice. An informed choice is often emphasized to rely on three assumptions: (1) the decision-maker has available information about the benefits and harms, (2) the decision-maker can understand and interpret this information, and (3) the decision-maker can relate this information to personal values and preferences. In this article, we empirically challenge the concept of informed choice in the context of medical screening. We use document analysis to analyze and build upon findings and interpretations from previously published articles on participation in screening. We find that citizens do not receive neutral or balanced information about benefits and harms, yet are exposed to manipulative framing effects. The citizens have high expectations about the benefits of screening, and therefore experience cognitive strains when informed about the harm. We demonstrate that decisions about screening participation are informed by neoliberal arguments of personal responsibility and cultural healthism, and thus cannot be regarded as decisions based on individual values and preferences independently of context. We argue that the concept of informed choice serves as a power technology for people to govern themselves and can be considered an implicit verification of biopower.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Grundtvig Gram
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, 1353 Copenhagen, Denmark
- Primary Health Care Research Unit, 4100 Region Zealand, Denmark
| | - Alexandra Brandt Ryborg Jønsson
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, 1353 Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of People and Technology, Roskilde University, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
- The Research Unit for General Practice, Department of Social Medicine, University of Tromsø, 9019 Tromsø, Norway
| | - John Brandt Brodersen
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, 1353 Copenhagen, Denmark
- Primary Health Care Research Unit, 4100 Region Zealand, Denmark
- The Research Unit for General Practice, Department of Social Medicine, University of Tromsø, 9019 Tromsø, Norway
| | - Christina Sadolin Damhus
- Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, 1353 Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|