1Department of Family Medicine, Ministry of Health, Muscat, Oman; 2Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat, Oman *Corresponding Author’s e-mail: asmaa_9988@hotmail.com التأثري النفسي لإلحالة لفحص الثدي باألشعة لسرطان الثدي بني النساء يف حمافظة مسقط دراسة مستعرضة نوف مبارك �لعلوي، نبيلة �لبلو�صي، �أ�صماء علي �ل�صلماين abstract: Objectives: Breast cancer constitutes the majority of diagnosed cancers in Oman’s females, accounting for 19.2%, which prompted the introduction of a breast cancer screening programme into the Omani healthcare system. There are rising international concerns about the effectiveness of mammography as a screening tool and its psychological impact. The current study aimed to determine the social, emotional and physical dysfunction caused by the waiting time from the day of scheduling the appointment until the day of screening and explore associated risk factors. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted between March and December 2017 at Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman, using a two-part self-administered questionnaire. Part one of the questionnaire collected clinical and demographic data. Part two consisted of the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ) and focused on psychological consequences, measuring the effect of mammographic screening on emotional, physical and social functions. Results: A total of 300 women aged ≥40 years old participated in this study (response rate: 100%). Results revealed that there was a minimal negative psychological impact from screening using mammograms. All PCQ domains were significantly impacted for participants who reported a family history of cancer (P = 0.007). The social score was significantly higher among women between 40–50 years old (P = 0.008). Scores of emotional and social functions were significantly affected by participants’ employment status; employed women were more affected than those who were not (P = 0.043 and 0.012, respectively). However, women’s levels of literacy did not affect any of the domains. Conclusion: The psychosocial impact of the waiting period between scheduling and undergoing mammography screening was minimal in the current sample. Future research should evaluate the psychosocial impact on patients at different recall times. Keywords: Breast Cancer; Mammography; Psychological Factors; Depression; Anxiety; Oman. امللخ�ص: الهدف: ي�صكل �رصطان �لثدي �لن�صبة �الأعلى من �ل�رصطانات �مل�صخ�صة يف ن�صاء ُعمان بن�صبة تعادل %19.2، مما �دى �إىل �إدر�ج بر�مج �لفح�س �ملبكر للثدي يف نظام �لرعاية �ل�صحية �لعماين. هناك خماوف عاملية متز�يدة ب�صاأن فعالية �لت�صوير �ل�صعاعي للثدي كاأد�ة فح�س وتاأثريه �لنف�صي. �لدر��صة �حلالية تهدف ملعرفة مدى �لتاأثر �لعاطفي و�جل�صدي و�لعجز �لبدين الذي ينتج من طول �نتظار �ملوعد من يوم حتديده وحتى يوم �لفح�س. كما تهدف �لدر��صة �إىل �كت�صاف عو�مل �خلطر �ملرتبطة. الطريقة: �أجريت هذه �لدر��صة �مل�صتعر�صة بني �صهر مار�س ودي�صمرب من عام 2017 يف م�صت�صفى خولة مبحافظة م�صقط، �صلطنة عمان، با�صتخد�م ��صتبيان ذ�تي يتكون من جزئني. �جلزء �الأول من �ال�صتبيان ت�صمن �لبيانات �ل�رصيرية و�لدميغر�فية. �أما �جلزء �لثاين فقد ت�صمن ��صتبيان �لعو�قب �لنف�صية وركز على �لعو�قب �لنف�صية، وقيا�س تاأثري �لفح�س �ل�صعاعي للثدي على النواحي �لعاطفية و�جل�صدية و�الجتماعية. النتائج: �صاركت 300 �مر�أة ترت�وح �أعمارهن بني 40 سنة وأكرث يف هذه �لدر��صة )معدل �ال�صتجابة: %100(. ك�صفت �لنتائج �أن �لتاأثري �لنف�صي �ل�صلبي من �لفح�س با�صتخد�م ت�صوير �لثدي باالأ�صعة قليل جد�. كما بينت �لنتائج تاأثر جميع جماالت ��صتبيان �لعو�قب �لنف�صية ب�صكل كبري للم�صاركات �لالتي �أبلغن عن تاريخ عائلي ملر�س �ل�رصطان )P = 0.007(. كانت النواحي �الجتماعية �أعلى تاأثر� يف �لن�صاء بني عمر 40-50 �صنة )P = 0.008(. تاأثرتالنواحي �لعاطفية و�الجتماعية ب�صكل كبري باحلالة �ملهنية للم�صرتكات؛ وكانت �لن�صاء �لعامالت �أكرث تاأثر� من �لالتيال يعملن )P = 0.043 و P =0.012، على �لتو�يل(. كما �أو�صحت �لدر��صة �أن �مل�صتوى �لتعليمي للمر�أة لي�س له تاأثري على �أي من �ملجاالت �لثالث. اخلال�صة: كان �لتاأثري �لنف�صي و�الجتماعي لفرتة �النتظار حتى وقت �خل�صوع لفح�س ت�صوير �لثدي �صئياًل يف �لعينة �حلالية. ين�صح بعمل �أبحاث م�صتقبلية لتقيم �لتاأثري �لنف�صي-�الجتماعي للمر�صى يف حال ��صتدعائهم الإعادة �لفح�س. الكلمات املفتاحية: �رصطان �لثدي؛ �لت�صوير �ل�صعاعي للثدي؛ عو�مل نف�صية؛ كاآبة؛ قلق؛ عمان. The Psychological Impact of Referral for Mammography Screening for Breast Cancer Among Women in Muscat Governorate A cross-sectional study Nouf M. Al-Alawi,1 Nabila Al-Balushi,1 *Asma A. Al Salmani2 Sultan Qaboos University Med J, August 2019, Vol. 19, Iss. 3, pp. e225–229, Epub. 5 Nov 19 Submitted 17 Dec 18 Revisions Req. 29 Jan, 19 Mar & 7 Apr 19; Revisions Recd. 25 Feb, 31 Mar & 18 Apr 19 Accepted 5 May 19 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. https://doi.org/10.18295/squmj.2019.19.03.008 clinical & basic research https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ The Psychological Impact of Referral for Mammography Screening for Breast Cancer Among Women in Muscat Governorate A cross-sectional study e226 | SQU Medical Journal, August 2019, Volume 19, Issue 3 Breast cancer is a major concern as it caused 410,000 deaths annually and is the leading cause of death due to cancer in women.1 El Saghir et al. conducted a literature and registry analysis in the American University of Beirut Medical Centre, Beirut, Lebanon, and estimated that breast cancer represents 13–35% of all female cancers in the Arab world.2 In addition, they found that women younger than 50 years old account for almost 50% of breast cancer patients in the Arab world, with a median age of 49–52 years compared to 63 years in more industrialised nations.2 In 2011, the Gulf Centre for Cancer Control reported that breast cancer accounted for 23.5% of all cancers among women.3 In Oman, breast cancer constitutes the majority of cancers in women, accounting for 19.2% of cases; 53.5% of these breast cancers occur in women under the age of 50.4 The highest incidence of breast cancer recorded in Muscat, Oman, was in 2008, at 15.6 cases per 100,000 women.5 Recently, mammography screening for breast cancer has been a subject of debate and international concern due to adverse pre-screening and post-screening effects reported in different trials.6–8 However, the level of anxiety felt by women waiting for breast cancer screening appointments has been shown to vary, reflecting patients’ varying levels of concern about breast cancer screening.9 The degree of pre-screening anxiety corresponds to the extent of the procedure’s invasiveness as shown in a study comparing physiological impact and demographic variability in women awaiting three different medical procedures, including mammo- graphy.10 These studies also showed that the time and place of baseline assessment should be considered before drawing any conclusions about the psychological effect of breast screening, as participants are not a homogeneous entity.9,10 In 2016, Oman’s Ministry of Health (MOH) initiated breast cancer screening via mammography for the early detection of breast cancer. The most recent MOH guidelines recommend a programme of breast cancer screening in all low-risk Omani women that are ≥40 years old, which is to be repeated every two years in case of normal results. The current study aimed to evaluate the psychological impact on women waiting for mammography screening after being referred for the procedure by their primary healthcare institution and associated risk factors. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted between March and November 2017 at the Radiology Department of Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman, which is one of the main secondary healthcare centres in Oman. The waiting time for mammography screening for eligible women ranged from 3–4 months according to the availability of appointments. The participants in this study were undergoing their first mammographic screening. Patients were recruited directly from the Radiology Department while waiting for their mammography appointment and included all female patients referred by their primary healthcare provider for mammo- graphy screening regardless of the waiting time since referral. Patients who were ≥40 years of age and able to understand and complete the self-administered questionnaire were included. Women who were preg- nant, not competent to give consent, attending for a follow-up screening, had a history of breast cancer, a psychological condition or were diagnosed with depr- ession were excluded. The study used a two-part self-administered quest- ionnaire. Part one collected clinical and demographic data including age, marital status, educational level and employment status. The clinical data included information about personal or family history of breast cancer. Part two was the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ), which is a reliable and valid measure of the effect of the mammographic screening on an individual's emotional, physical and social function. It includes 12 items and three domains, with five items measuring emotional dysfunction, four items measuring physical dysfunction and three items meas- uring social dysfunction. The ratings for the symptoms within each of the domains were added to give a score, indicating the level of dysfunction in that domain with a higher score indicating greater dysfunction. The PCQ Advances in Knowledge - The psychological effects of the waiting period between the day of referral and mammography screening were minimal. Application to Patient Care - The psychological impact of mammography screening suggests that patients with family history of cancer and those employed experience some degree of stress during the time between scheduling the examination and undergoing the screening. - Employed women with a family history of cancer or aged 40–50 years may require counselling and/or referral to a psychologist prior to mammography screening to mitigate the psychological impact of the pre-screening waiting period. Nouf M. Al-Alawi, Nabila Al-Balushi and Asma A. Al Salmani Clinical and Basic Research | e227 has been previously utilised for psychological screening in both pre- and post-mammography screening periods.11 However, since the PCQ had not been previously available in Arabic, the investigators had to translate and validate it for this study. For linguistic validation, the Arabic version was translated back into English to determine the equivalence of the concepts in the questionnaire. The Arabic version was piloted in a different hospital with 20 participants for cultural validation, including the appropriateness of the wording and potential misinterpretations; few amendments were required. The participants were asked to complete the quest- ionnaire and the PCQ while waiting for their mammo- gram in the waiting area of the Radiology Department. Any queries were answered by the investigators. For illit- erate women, the questionnaire was completed by the investigators, who verbally asked the women the questions. Descriptive statistics were computed for socio- demographic characteristics and all items in the questionnaire. The mean and standard deviation (SD) were reported for continuous variables, while freq- uencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables. The association of the independent variables with the outcome variables was estimated using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney-U tests. The two- tailed significance level was set at P ≤0.05. All statistical analyses were carried out using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), Version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, USA). The research protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Khoula Hospital. Verbal consent was obtained from all participants after providing a full explanation of the study. Results A total of 300 women aged ≥40 years participated in this study (response rate: 100%). A total of 196 participants (65.3%) were between 40–50 years of age, while 77 women (25.7%) were between 51–60 years of age. Most participants were Omani (91%) and had graduated from university (35%). The remainder had graduated from secondary school (23%), were illiterate (22.3%) or could read and write but had not completed secondary school (19.7%). The majority of participants were married (79.3%) and unemployed (64.7%). A total of 77 women (25.7%) reported having a history of cancer in their family [Table 1]. A total of 212 women (70.7%) reported not having any social dysfunction in response to waiting for mammography screening, while 187 (62.3%) and 171 (57%) reported not having any physical or emotional dysfunction, respectively. Only 21 (7%), 13 (4.3%) and 12 (4%) women reported dysfunction "quite a lot of the time" in the emotional, physical and social domains, respectively. One-third of the participants reported “rarely” or “some of the time” for emotional (36.3%) and physical (32.7%) dysfunction, while only a quarter reported the same for social dysfunction (25.6%) [Figure 1]. The results showed that social dysfunction was significantly higher in respondents between 40–50 Table 1: Characteristics of women who underwent mammography screening at Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman (N = 300) Characteristic n (%) Age in years 40–50 196 (65.3) 51–60 77 (25.7) >60 27 (9) Nationality Omani 273 (91) Non-Omani 27 (9) Region of Residence Muscat 288 (96) North Batinah 6 (2.1) South Batinah 2 (0.7) South Sharqiah 2 (0.7) Dakhiliah 2 (0.7) Literacy level University graduate 105 (35) Secondary school graduate 69 (23) Illiterate 67 (22.3) Literate* 59 (19.7) Marital status Married 238 (79.3) Widowed 32 (10.7) Single 16 (5.3) Divorced 14 (4.7) Employment status Employed 106 (35.3) Unemployed 194 (64.7) Family history of cancer Yes 77 (25.7) No 223 (74.3) *Did not complete secondary school. The Psychological Impact of Referral for Mammography Screening for Breast Cancer Among Women in Muscat Governorate A cross-sectional study e228 | SQU Medical Journal, August 2019, Volume 19, Issue 3 years of age (P = 0.008). Literacy levels did not have a significant effect on any of the PCQ domains. Emotional and social scores were significantly affected by participants’ employment status; women who were employed were significantly more affected than those who were unemployed (P = 0.043 and 0.012, respectively). Marital status did not have a significant effect on any of the PCQ domains, perhaps due to the fact that most participants (79.3%) were married. Interestingly, participants who reported a history of cancer in their family had significantly higher scores in all three domains of the PCQ (P = 0.047, 0.008 and 0.007 for emotional, physical and social scores, respectively) [Table 2]. Discussion Undergoing any health-related screening exposes the patient to the possibility of an unintended adverse effect, most commonly increased anxiety.12,13 The negative psychological impact of waiting for mammography screening was found to be minimal in the current sample. The percentage of women reporting dysfunction in their emotional, physical or social well-being “quite a lot of the time”, as measured by the PCQ, was less than 7%. This finding is similar to other studies which found low levels of anxiety.9,14 This might be explained by either the fact that women in the current study received good counselling at the time of referral or that mammography screening is a minimally invasive procedure.10 The present results confirmed that age has a negative effect on participants’ social scores, which were significantly higher in those aged 40–50 years (P = 0.008). This finding might be due to the fact that younger women are more aware of disease con- sequences and treatments available.15 Several other studies Table 2: Psychological Consequences Questionnaire results showing the affected psychological functions as expressed through the characteristics of women who underwent mammography screening at Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman (N = 300) Characteristic Mean emotional score ± SD P value* Mean physical score ± SD P value* Mean social score ± SD P value* Age in years 40–50 3.93 ± 4.16 0.189 2.72 ± 3.10 0.182 1.69 ± 2.24 0.008 51–60 3.32 ± 3.50 2.29 ± 2.84 0.94 ± 1.67 >60 2.38 ± 3.26 1.61 ± 2.41 0.61 ± 1.16 Educational level Illiterate 3.09 ± 3.60 0.553 2.33 ± 2.95 0.106 1.06 ± 1.78 0.405 Literate† 4.34 ± 4.42 3.10 ± 3.34 1.86 ± 2.48 Secondary school 3.58 ± 3.89 2.94 ± 3.14 1.41 ± 1.95 University graduate 3.73 ± 3.83 1.98 ± 2.58 1.28 ± 1.98 Employment status Employed 4.17 ± 4.11 0.043 2.40 ± 2.89 0.637 1.67 ± 2.23 0.012 Unemployed 3.26 ± 3.76 2.42 ± 2.96 1.13 ± 1.88 Family history of cancer Yes 1.67 ± 2.23 0.047 1.67 ± 2.23 0.008 1.67 ± 2.23 0.007 No 1.13 ± 1.88 1.13 ± 1.88 1.13 ± 1.88 SD = standard deviation. *Using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney-U tests. †Did not complete secondary school. Figure 1: The psychological impact of the waiting time from the day of referral to mammography screening in women at Khoula Hospital, Muscat, Oman (N = 300). Nouf M. Al-Alawi, Nabila Al-Balushi and Asma A. Al Salmani Clinical and Basic Research | e229 have also shown an inverse relationship between age and psychological outcomes.16 Having a family history of cancer is associated with a significant psychological impact for screening for any type of cancer.17 In the current study, all three PCQ domains were significantly influenced in the participants who reported a history of familial cancer. Similarly, Taylor et al. found a positive correlation between the perceived risk and a family history of cancer in men screened for prostate carcinoma and that these men had a particularly high level of psychological distress.17 In a study by Fujiwara et al., the level of education of participants with serious psy- chological distress significantly increased their willingness to participate in cancer screening.16 However, in the current study, education level of the participants had no significant effect on the PCQ results. Conclusion The current study found that the waiting time between the day of referral and the day of the mammography screening had only minimal impact on the social, emotional and physical well-being of the participants. Further research is required in this field and future studies should include patients undergoing other screening tests. c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t The authors declare no conflict of interest. f u n d i n g No funding was received for this study. References 1. Ferlay J, Héry C, Autier P, Sankaranarayanan R. Global Burden of Breast Cancer. In: Li CI, Ed. Breast Cancer Epidemiology. New York, USA: Springer, 2010. Pp 1–19. 2. El Saghir NS, Khalil MK, Eid T, El Kinge AR, Charafeddine M, Geara F, et al.Trends in epidemiology and management of breast cancer in developing Arab countries: A literature and registry analysis. Int J Surg 2007; 5:225–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijsu.2006.06.015. 3. Gulf Center for Cancer Control and Prevention. Ten-Year Cancer Incidence Among Nationals of the GCC States 1998–2007. From: www.moh.gov.bh/Content/Files/Publications/GCC%20 Cancer%20Incidence%202011.pdf Accessed: Apr 2019. 4. Mehdi I, Monem EA, Al Bahrani BJ, Al Kharusi S, Nada AM, Al Lawati J, et al. Age at diagnosis of female breast cancer in Oman: Issues and implications. South Asian J Cancer 2014; 3:101–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/2278-330X.130442. 5. Renganathan L, Ramasubramaniam S, Al-Touby S, Seshan V, Al-Balushi A, Al-Amri W, et al. What do Omani women know about breast cancer symptoms? Oman Med J 2014; 29:408–13. https://doi.org/10.5001/omj.2014.110. 6. Miller AB, Wall C, Baines CJ, Sun P, To T, Narod SA. Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: Randomised screening trial. BMJ 2014; 348:g366. https://doi.org/10.1136/ bmj.g366. 7. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med 2012; 367:1998–2005. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1206809. 8. Bond M, Pavey T, Welch K, Cooper C, Garside R, Dean S, et al. Systematic review of the psychological consequences of false- positive screening mammograms. Health Technol Assess 2013; 17:1–170, v–vi. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta17130. 9. Swanson V, McIntosh IB, Power KG, Dobson H. The psychological effects of breast screening in terms of patients’ perceived health anxieties. Br J Clin Pract 1996; 50:129–35. 10. Weller A, Hener T. Invasiveness of medical procedures and state anxiety in women. Behav Med 1993; 19:60–5. https://doi.org/10.1 080/08964289.1993.9937566. 11. Rijnsburger AJ, Essink-Bot ML, van As E, Cockburn J, de Koning HJ. Measuring psychological consequences of screening: Adaptation of the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire into Dutch. Qual Life Res 2006;15:933–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136- 005-5093-8. 12. Leggatt V, Mackay J, Marteau TM, Yates JR. The psychological impact of a cancer family history questionnaire completed in general practice. J Med Genet 2000; 37:470–2. https://doi.org/10.1 136/jmg.37.6.470. 13. Croyle RT. Psychosocial effects of screening for disease prevention and detection. New York, USA: Oxford University Press, 1995. P. 218. 14. Bull AR, Campbell MJ. Assessment of the psychological impact of a breast screening programme. Br J Radiol 1991; 64:510–15. https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-64-762-510. 15. Løken K, Steine S, Laerum E. Mammography: Influence of departmental practice and women’s characteristics on patient satisfaction: Comparison of six departments in Norway. Qual Health Care 1998; 7:136–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.7.3.136. 16. Fujiwara M, Inagaki M, Nakaya N, Fujimori M, Higuchi Y, Kakeda K, et al. Association between serious psychological distress and nonparticipation in cancer screening and the modifying effect of socioeconomic status: Analysis of anonymized data from a national cross-sectional survey in Japan. Cancer 2018; 124:555–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31086. 17. Taylor KL, DiPlacido J, Redd WH, Faccenda K, Greer L, Perlmutter A. Demographics, family histories, and psychological characteristics of prostate carcinoma screening participants. Cancer 1999; 85:1305–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097- 0142(19990315)85:6<1305::AID-CNCR13>3.0.CO;2-I. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2006.06.015 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2006.06.015 https://doi.org/10.4103/2278-330X.130442 https://doi.org/10.5001/omj.2014.110 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g366 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g366 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1206809 https://doi.org/10.3310/hta17130 https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.1993.9937566 https://doi.org/10.1080/08964289.1993.9937566 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-5093-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-5093-8 https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.37.6.470 https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.37.6.470 https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-64-762-510 https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.7.3.136 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31086 https://doi.org/10.1002/%28SICI%291097-0142%2819990315%2985:6%3C1305::AID-CNCR13%3E3.0.CO%3B2-I https://doi.org/10.1002/%28SICI%291097-0142%2819990315%2985:6%3C1305::AID-CNCR13%3E3.0.CO%3B2-I