Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial
Access status:
Open Access
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Hersch, JolynBarratt, Alexandra
Jansen, Jesse
Irwig, Les
McGeechan, Kevin
Jacklyn, Gemma
Thornton, Hazel
Dhillon, Haryana
Houssami, Nehmat
McCaffery, Kirsten
Abstract
Background: Mammography screening can reduce breast cancer mortality. However, most women are unaware that inconsequential disease can also be detected by screening, leading to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We aimed to investigate whether including information about overdetection ...
See moreBackground: Mammography screening can reduce breast cancer mortality. However, most women are unaware that inconsequential disease can also be detected by screening, leading to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We aimed to investigate whether including information about overdetection of breast cancer in a decision aid would help women aged around 50 years to make an informed choice about breast screening. Methods: We did a community-based, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in New South Wales, Australia, using a random cohort of women aged 48–50 years. Recruitment to the study was done by telephone; women were eligible if they had not had mammography in the past 2 years and did not have a personal or strong family history of breast cancer. With a computer program, we randomly assigned 879 participants to either the intervention decision aid (comprising evidence-based explanatory and quantitative information on overdetection, breast cancer mortality reduction, and false positives) or a control decision aid (including information on breast cancer mortality reduction and false positives). Participants and interviewers were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was informed choice (defined as adequate knowledge and consistency between attitudes and screening intentions), which we assessed by telephone interview about 3 weeks after random allocation. The primary outcome was analysed in all women who completed the relevant follow-up interview questions fully. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12613001035718. Findings: Between January, 2014, and July, 2014, 440 women were allocated to the intervention group and 439 were assigned to the control group. 21 women in the intervention group and 20 controls were lost to follow-up; a further ten women assigned to the intervention and 11 controls did not answer all questions on attitudes. Therefore, 409 women in the intervention group and 408 controls were analysed for the primary outcome. 99 (24%) of 409 women in the intervention group made an informed choice compared with 63 (15%) of 408 in the control group (difference 9%, 95% CI 3–14; p=0·0017). Compared with controls, more women in the intervention group met the threshold for adequate overall knowledge (122/419 [29%] vs 71/419 [17%]; difference 12%, 95% CI 6–18; p<0·0001), fewer women expressed positive attitudes towards screening (282/409 [69%] vs 340/408 [83%]; 14%, 9–20; p<0·0001), and fewer women intended to be screened (308/419 [74%] vs 363/419 [87%]; 13%, 8–19; p<0·0001). When conceptual knowledge alone was considered, 203 (50%) of 409 women in the intervention group made an informed choice compared with 79 (19%) of 408 in the control group (p<0·0001). Interpretation: Information on overdetection of breast cancer provided within a decision aid increased the number of women making an informed choice about breast screening. Becoming better informed might mean women are less likely to choose screening. Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.
See less
See moreBackground: Mammography screening can reduce breast cancer mortality. However, most women are unaware that inconsequential disease can also be detected by screening, leading to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We aimed to investigate whether including information about overdetection of breast cancer in a decision aid would help women aged around 50 years to make an informed choice about breast screening. Methods: We did a community-based, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in New South Wales, Australia, using a random cohort of women aged 48–50 years. Recruitment to the study was done by telephone; women were eligible if they had not had mammography in the past 2 years and did not have a personal or strong family history of breast cancer. With a computer program, we randomly assigned 879 participants to either the intervention decision aid (comprising evidence-based explanatory and quantitative information on overdetection, breast cancer mortality reduction, and false positives) or a control decision aid (including information on breast cancer mortality reduction and false positives). Participants and interviewers were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was informed choice (defined as adequate knowledge and consistency between attitudes and screening intentions), which we assessed by telephone interview about 3 weeks after random allocation. The primary outcome was analysed in all women who completed the relevant follow-up interview questions fully. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12613001035718. Findings: Between January, 2014, and July, 2014, 440 women were allocated to the intervention group and 439 were assigned to the control group. 21 women in the intervention group and 20 controls were lost to follow-up; a further ten women assigned to the intervention and 11 controls did not answer all questions on attitudes. Therefore, 409 women in the intervention group and 408 controls were analysed for the primary outcome. 99 (24%) of 409 women in the intervention group made an informed choice compared with 63 (15%) of 408 in the control group (difference 9%, 95% CI 3–14; p=0·0017). Compared with controls, more women in the intervention group met the threshold for adequate overall knowledge (122/419 [29%] vs 71/419 [17%]; difference 12%, 95% CI 6–18; p<0·0001), fewer women expressed positive attitudes towards screening (282/409 [69%] vs 340/408 [83%]; 14%, 9–20; p<0·0001), and fewer women intended to be screened (308/419 [74%] vs 363/419 [87%]; 13%, 8–19; p<0·0001). When conceptual knowledge alone was considered, 203 (50%) of 409 women in the intervention group made an informed choice compared with 79 (19%) of 408 in the control group (p<0·0001). Interpretation: Information on overdetection of breast cancer provided within a decision aid increased the number of women making an informed choice about breast screening. Becoming better informed might mean women are less likely to choose screening. Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.
See less
Date
2015-04-25Publisher
Elsevier: LancetLicence
NOTICE: This is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in The Lancet. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in The Lancet [Volume 385, Issue 9978, 25 April–1 May 2015] DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60123-4.Citation
Hersch J, Barratt A, Jansen J, Irwig L, McGeechan K, Jacklyn G, Thornton H, Dhillon H, Houssami N, McCaffery K. Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015 Apr 25; 385(9978): 1642-1652. PubMed PMID: 25701273.Share