4% lidocaine gel applied to the breasts before screening mammography reduced discomfort.

Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
ACP journal club 12/2008; 149(5):9. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-10-200811180-02009
Source: PubMed
Download full-text


Available from: Chris Del Mar, Jan 07, 2015
32 Reads
  • The Lancet 12/2001; 358(9299):2165; author reply 2167-8. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)07193-8 · 45.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although guidelines recommend that clinicians consider life expectancy before screening older women for breast cancer, many older women with limited life expectancies are screened. We aimed to identify factors important to mammography screening decisions among women aged 80 and older compared to women aged 65-79. Telephone surveys of 107 women aged 80+ and 93 women aged 65-79 randomly selected from one academic primary care practice who were able to communicate in English (60% response rate). The survey addressed the following factors in regards to older women's mammography screening decisions: perceived importance of a history of breast disease, family history of breast cancer, doctor's recommendations, habit, reassurance, previous experience, mailed reminder cards, family/friend's recommendations or experience with breast cancer, age, health, and media. The survey also assessed older women's preferred role in decision making around mammography screening. Of the 200 women, 65.5% were non-Hispanic white and 82.8% were in good to excellent health. Most (81.3%) had undergone mammography in the past 2 years. Regardless of age, older women ranked doctor's recommendations as the most important factor influencing their decision to get screened. Habit and reassurance were the next two highly ranked factors influencing older women to get screened. Among women who did not get screened, women aged 80 and older ranked age and doctor's counseling as the most influential factors and women aged 65-79 ranked a previous negative experience with mammography as the most important factor. There were no significant differences in preferred role in decision-making around mammography screening by age, however, most women in both age groups preferred to make the final decision on their own (46.6% of women aged 80+ and 50.5% of women aged 65-79). While a doctor's recommendation is the most important factor influencing elderly women's mammography screening decisions, habit and reassurance also strongly influence decision-making. Interventions aimed at improving clinician counseling about mammography, which include discussions around habit and reassurance, may result in better decision-making.
    BMC Geriatrics 02/2007; 7(1):26. DOI:10.1186/1471-2318-7-26 · 1.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A variety of estimates of the benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer have been published and national policies vary. To assess the effect of screening for breast cancer with mammography on mortality and morbidity. We searched PubMed (June 2005). Randomised trials comparing mammographic screening with no mammographic screening. Both authors independently extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Seven completed and eligible trials involving half a million women were identified. We excluded a biased trial from analysis. Two trials with adequate randomisation did not show a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality, relative risk (RR) 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.09) at 13 years; four trials with suboptimal randomisation showed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality, RR 0.75 (0.67 to 0.83) (P = 0.02 for difference between the two estimates). RR for all six trials combined was 0.80 (0.73 to 0.88). The two trials with adequate randomisation did not find an effect of screening on cancer mortality, including breast cancer, RR 1.02 (0.95 to 1.10) after 10 years, or on all-cause mortality, RR 1.00 (0.96 to 1.04) after 13 years. We found that breast cancer mortality was an unreliable outcome that was biased in favour of screening, mainly because of differential misclassification of cause of death. Numbers of lumpectomies and mastectomies were significantly larger in the screened groups, RR 1.31 (1.22 to 1.42) for the two adequately randomised trials; the use of radiotherapy was similarly increased. Screening likely reduces breast cancer mortality. Based on all trials, the reduction is 20%, but as the effect is lower in the highest quality trials, a more reasonable estimate is a 15% relative risk reduction. Based on the risk level of women in these trials, the absolute risk reduction was 0.05%. Screening also leads to overdiagnosis and overtreatment, with an estimated 30% increase, or an absolute risk increase of 0.5%. This means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will have her life prolonged. In addition, 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be diagnosed as breast cancer patients and will be treated unnecessarily. It is thus not clear whether screening does more good than harm. Women invited to screening should be fully informed of both benefits and harms.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 02/2006; 18(4):CD001877. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub2 · 6.03 Impact Factor