Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychological Considerations in Attending for Mammography Screening

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Digital Mammography

  • 3229 Accesses

Abstract

The UK NHS Breast Screening Programme has set a national minimum rate for uptake of routine invitations at 70 % [1]. In 2012–2013, 2.32 million women aged 50–70 were invited to attend for a routine mammogram, 72.2 % of whom complied. This represented a further decrease from previous years in which uptake of routine invitations had fallen (73.4 % in 2010–11 and 73.1 % in 2011–12 [1]). Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women in the UK [2], with more than 80 % survival 5 years after diagnosis [3]. Screening can help reduce breast cancer mortality [4], so why would 27.8 % of women in 2012–2013 fail to accept an invitation for a routine mammogram which may ultimately help to save their lives?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Health and Social Care Information Centre. Breast Screening Programme, England: Statistics for 2012–13. 27 Feb 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tyndel S, Austoker J, Henderson BJ, Brain K, Bankhead C, Clements A, Watson EK. What is the psychological impact of mammographic screening on younger women with a family history of breast cancer? Findings from a prospective cohort study by the PIMMS management group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(25):3823–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Breast cancer campaign; breast cancer statistics. http://www.breastcancercampaign.org/about-breast-cancer/breast-cancer-statistics#./breast-cancer-statistics?&_suid=14006502705250758720157245188. Accessed 12 May 2014.

  4. National Cancer Institute. Mammography. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/detection/mammograms. Accessed 12 May 2014.

  5. Carpenter CJ. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of health belief model variables in predicting behaviour. Health Commun. 2010;25(8):661–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rosenstock IM. Why people use health services. Milbank Meml Fund Q. 1966;44:94–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hyman RB, Baker S, Ephraim R, Moadel A, Philip J. Health beliefs model variables as predictors of screening mammography utilisation. J Behav Med. 1994;17(4):391–406.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hopwood P. Breast cancer perception: what do we know and understand? Breast Cancer Res. 2000;2:387–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Haas JS, Kaplan CP, Des Jarlais G, Gildengoin V, Pérez-Stable EJ, Kerlikowske K. Perceived risk of breast cancer among women at average and increased risk. J Womens Health. 2005;14(9):845–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yavan T, Akyü A, Tosun N, Iyigün E. Women’s breast cancer risk perception and attitudes towards screening tests. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2010;28(2):189–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jones SC, Magee CA, Barrie LR, Iverson DC, Gregory P, Hanks EL, Nelson AE, Nehill CL, Zorbas HM. Australian women’s perceptions of breast cancer risk factors and the risk of developing breast cancer. Womens Health Issues. 2011;21(5):353–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cull A, Anderson EDC, Campbell S, Mackay J, Smyth E, Steel M. The impact of genetic counselling about breast cancer risk on women’s risk perceptions and levels of distress. Br J Cancer. 1999;79:501–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Evans DGR, Blair V, Greenhalgh R, Hopwood P, Howell A. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1994;70:934–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hopwood P, Long A, Keeling F, Poole C, Evans DGR, Howell A. Psychological support needs for women at high genetic risk of breast cancer: some preliminary indicators. Psychooncology. 1998;7:402–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Watson M, Lloyd S, Davidson J, Meyer L, Eeles R, Ebbs S, Murday V. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception and mental health in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1999;79:868–74.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. NHS Breast Screening Programme. Annual review. Sheffield: NHS; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cameron D. Reviewing the evidence for breast screening, NHS Breast Screening Programme Annual Review. Sheffield: NHS; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Steckelberg A, Kasper J, Redegeld M, Muhlhauser I. Risk information – barrier to informed choice? A focus group study. Soz Preventivmed. 2004;49(6):375–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Keefe RJ, Hauck ER, Egert J, Rimer B, Kornguth P. Mammography pain and discomfort: a cognitive behavioural perspective. Pain. 1994;56:247–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hamilton EL, Wallis MG, Barlow J, Cullen L, Wright C. Women’s views of a breast cancer service. Health Care Women Int. 2003;24:40–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Marks DF, Murray M, Evans B, Willig C, Woodall C, Sykes CM. Health psychology: theory, research and practice. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ajzen I. From intention to actions: a theory of planned behaviour. In: Kuhl J, Beckmann J, editors. Action-control: from cognition to behaviour. Heidelberg: Springer; 1985. p. 11–39.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Wu TY, West B, Chen YW, Hergert C. Health beliefs and practices related to breast cancer screening in Philippino, Chinese and Asian-Indian women. Cancer Detect Prev. 2006;30(1):58–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vadaparampil ST, Champion VL, Miller TK, Menon U, Sugg-Skinner C. Using the health belief model to examine differences in adherence to mammography among African-American and Caucasian women. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2005;21:59–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Consedine NS, Magai C, Horton D, Neugut AI, Gillespie M. Health belief model factors in mammography screening: testing for interactions among subpopulations of Caribbean women. Ethn Dis. 2005;15(3):444–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Thomas VN, Saleem T, Abraham R. Barriers to effective uptake of cancer screening among black and minority ethnic groups. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2005;11(11):562–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lagerlund M, Sontrop JM, Zachrisson S. Psychosocial factors and attendance at a population-based mammography screening program in a cohort of Swedish women. BMC Women’s Health. 2014;14:33. doi:10.1186/1472-6874/14/33.

  28. Hajian-Tilaki K, Auladi S. Health belief model and practice of breast self-examination and breast cancer screening in Iranian women. Breast Cancer. 2012;21(4):429–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH. Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Educ Q. 1988;15(2):175–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rutter D, Quine L, Steadman L, Thompson, S. Increasing attendance at breast cancer screening: Field trial. Final report. University of Kent 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Joffe H. Risk and the ‘other’. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sarafino EP. Health psychology: biopsychosocial interactions. 4th ed. New York: Wiley; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Talbert PV. The relationship of fear and fatalism with breast cancer screening among a selected target population of African American middle class women. J Soc Behav Health Sci. 2008;2(1):96–110.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Phillips JM, Cohen MZ, Moses G. Breast cancer screening and African American women: fear fatalism and silence. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1999;26(3):561–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Blaxter M. The causes of disease: women talking. Soc Sci Med. 1983;17:59–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Russell KM, Swenson MM, Skelton AM, Shedd-Steele R. The meaning of health in mammography screening for African American women. Health Care Women Int. 2003;24:27–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Borrayo EA, Jenkins SR. Feeling healthy: so why should Mexican-descent women screen for breast cancer? Qual Health Res. 2001;11:812–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Powe BD. Cancer fatalism – spiritual perspectives. J Relig Health. 1997;36(2):135–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kearney AJ. Increasing our understanding of breast self-examination: women talk about cancer, the health care system and being women. Qual Health Res. 2006;16(6):802–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Borrayo EA, Jenkins SR. Feeling indecent: breast cancer screening resistance of Mexican-descent women. J Health Psychol. 2001;6:537–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zelenyanszki C. Maximising screening attendance: a reference guide. NHS: North West London Cancer Network; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bond M, Pavey T, Welch K, Cooper C, Garside R, Dean S, Hyde C. Systematic review of the psychological consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. Health Technol Assess. 2013;17(13):1–170.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ, Welch HG. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. J Am Med Assoc. 2004;291:71–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Bredal S, Kåresen R, Skaane P, Engelstad KS, Ekeberg Ø. Recall mammography and psychological distress. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(4):805–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Salz T, Richman AR, Brewer NT. Meta-analyses of the effect of false-positive mammograms on generic and specific psychosocial outcomes. Psychooncology. 2010;19:26–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. McCann J, Stockton D, Godward S. Impact of false-positive mammography on subsequent screening attendance and risk of cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2002;4. doi:10.1186/bcr455. Accessed 1 June 2014.

  47. Marshall G. A comparative study of re-attenders and non re-attenders for second triennial National Breast Screening Programme appointments. J Public Health Med. 1994;16:79–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Marmot M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. The Lancet. 2012;380(9855):1778–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Salford, Frederick Road, Salford, M6 6PU, UK

    Anne Pearson & Ashley Weinberg

Authors
  1. Anne Pearson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ashley Weinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Pearson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Salford, Salford, United Kingdom

    Peter Hogg

  2. Breast Care Unit, Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Chester, United Kingdom

    Judith Kelly

  3. The Nightingale Centre and Genesis Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester, Wythenshawe Hospital,, Manchester, United Kingdom

    Claire Mercer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pearson, A., Weinberg, A. (2015). Psychological Considerations in Attending for Mammography Screening. In: Hogg, P., Kelly, J., Mercer, C. (eds) Digital Mammography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04831-4_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04831-4_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04830-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04831-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation