Risk perception, worry, and test acceptance in average-risk women who undergo ovarian cancer screening - 24/02/14
, Robert C. Bast, MD b, Mary A. Hernandez, RN, MSN b, Diane C. Bodurka, MD a, Steven Skates, PhD c, Charlotte C. Sun, DrPH, MPH aAbstract |
Objective |
We evaluated baseline knowledge of ovarian cancer risk and perceptions toward ovarian cancer screening (OCS) by initiating the normal risk ovarian screening study.
Study Design |
Average-risk, postmenopausal women were enrolled between 2001 and 2011 as they entered the normal risk ovarian screening study. Participants completed baseline surveys of risk perception, cancer worry (Cancer Worry Scale), anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), health and well-being survey (SF-36 HEALTH SURVEY), and acceptability of OCS.
Results |
Of the 1242 women who were enrolled, 925 women (74.5%) completed surveys. The respondents estimated a mean lifetime risk of ovarian cancer of 29.9%, which is much higher than the actual risk of 1.4% for women in the United States. Only 2.8% of participants correctly estimated their risk; 35.4% of the participants reported their lifetime risk to be ≥50%. Cancer worry was low, with a median Cancer Worry Scale score of 7 of 24. Anxiety was comparable with published norms for women in this age group, with median STAI-State and STAI-Trait scores of 30 and 29 of 80, respectively. Overall, women reported good physical and mental well-being. In terms of OCS acceptability, 97.2% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that “the benefits of screening outweigh the difficulties.” Very few women were reluctant to undergo OCS because of time constraints (1.1%), pain (2.0%), or embarrassment (1.9%).
Conclusion |
Average-risk women who underwent OCS highly overestimated their risk of ovarian cancer. Despite this, participants reported low cancer worry and anxiety. The discrepancy between knowledge of and attitudes toward ovarian cancer risk highlights the need for educational efforts in this area.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : acceptability of screening, cancer worry, ovarian cancer screening, risk perception
Plan
| Supported by funds from the M.D. Anderson SPORE in Ovarian Cancer, NCI P50 CA83639, and grant number T32 CA101642 from a National Institutes of Health National Research Service Award, the Bioinformatics Shared Resources of the MD Anderson CCSG NCI P30 CA16672, the National Foundation for Cancer Research, philanthropic support from Golfers Against Cancer, the Tracey Jo Wilson Foundation, the Mossy Foundation, the Norton family, and Stuart and Gaye Lynn Zarrow; and in part by grant number CA152990 from National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network (S.S.). |
|
| The contents of this study report are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or National Institutes of Health. |
|
| R.C.B. receives royalties for CA125 from Fujirebio Diagnostics Inc (Malvern, PA) and honoraria from Vermillion Inc (Austin, TX) for service on their Scientific Advisory Board; S.S. is a faculty member at Massachusetts General Hospital, which has licensed the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm. All other authors report no conflict of interest. |
|
| Cite this article as: Holman LL, Lu KH, Bast RC, et al. Risk perception, worry, and test acceptance in average-risk women who undergo ovarian cancer screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014;210:257.e1-6. |
Vol 210 - N° 3
P. 257.e1-257.e6 - mars 2014 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Reproductive and oncologic outcomes after progestin therapy for endometrial complex atypical hyperplasia or carcinoma
- Rashmi Kudesia, Tomer Singer, Thomas A. Caputo, Kevin Michael Holcomb, Isaac Kligman, Zev Rosenwaks, Divya Gupta
- Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the management of recurrent high-grade uterine sarcoma with peritoneal dissemination
- William A. Jimenez, Armando Sardi, Carol Nieroda, Vadim Gushchin
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?