Communication of cancer screening results by letter, telephone or in person: A mixed methods systematic review of the effect on attendee anxiety, understanding and preferences

Sian Williamson, Jacoby Patterson, Rebecca Crosby, Rebecca Johnson, Harbinder Sandhu, Samantha Johnson, Jacquie Jenkins, Margaret Casey, Olive Kearins, Sian Taylor Phillips

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Attending and receiving a result from screening can be an anxious process. Using an appropriate method to deliver screening results could improve communication and reduce negative outcomes for screening attendees.

Screening programmes are increasingly communicating results by letter or telephone rather than in-person. We investigated the impact of communication methods on attendees. We systematically reviewed the literature on the communication methods used to deliver results in cancer screening programmes for women, focusing on screening attendee anxiety, understanding of results and preferences for results communication. We included qualitative and quantitative research. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Embase. Results were analysed using framework synthesis. 10,558 papers were identified with seven studies meeting the inclusion criteria.

Several key ideas emerged from the synthesis including speed, accuracy of results, visual support, ability to ask questions, privacy of results location and managing expectations.

Verbal communication methods (telephone and in-person) were preferred and facilitated greater understanding than written methods, although there was considerable variability in attendee preferences. Findings for anxiety were mixed, with no clear consensus on which method of communication might minimise attendee anxiety.

The low number of identified studies and generally low quality evidence suggest we do not know the most appropriate communication methods in the delivery of cancer screening results. More research is needed to directly compare methods of results communication, focusing on what impact each method may have on screening attendees.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)189-195
Number of pages7
JournalPreventive Medicine Reports
Volume13
Early online date29 Dec 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2019

Fingerprint

Early Detection of Cancer
Telephone
Anxiety
Communication
Aptitude
Qualitative Research
Privacy
MEDLINE
Libraries
Consensus
Research

Bibliographical note

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).

Keywords

  • Communication
  • Mass screening
  • Mixed methods
  • Psychology
  • Review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Informatics
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Communication of cancer screening results by letter, telephone or in person: A mixed methods systematic review of the effect on attendee anxiety, understanding and preferences. / Williamson, Sian ; Patterson, Jacoby; Crosby, Rebecca ; Johnson, Rebecca; Sandhu, Harbinder ; Johnson, Samantha ; Jenkins, Jacquie ; Casey, Margaret; Kearins, Olive ; Taylor Phillips, Sian.

In: Preventive Medicine Reports, Vol. 13, 03.2019, p. 189-195.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Williamson, Sian ; Patterson, Jacoby ; Crosby, Rebecca ; Johnson, Rebecca ; Sandhu, Harbinder ; Johnson, Samantha ; Jenkins, Jacquie ; Casey, Margaret ; Kearins, Olive ; Taylor Phillips, Sian. / Communication of cancer screening results by letter, telephone or in person: A mixed methods systematic review of the effect on attendee anxiety, understanding and preferences. In: Preventive Medicine Reports. 2019 ; Vol. 13. pp. 189-195.
@article{8cd17abf18954dd8bb9510f5046908fd,
title = "Communication of cancer screening results by letter, telephone or in person: A mixed methods systematic review of the effect on attendee anxiety, understanding and preferences",
abstract = "Attending and receiving a result from screening can be an anxious process. Using an appropriate method to deliver screening results could improve communication and reduce negative outcomes for screening attendees.Screening programmes are increasingly communicating results by letter or telephone rather than in-person. We investigated the impact of communication methods on attendees. We systematically reviewed the literature on the communication methods used to deliver results in cancer screening programmes for women, focusing on screening attendee anxiety, understanding of results and preferences for results communication. We included qualitative and quantitative research. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Embase. Results were analysed using framework synthesis. 10,558 papers were identified with seven studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Several key ideas emerged from the synthesis including speed, accuracy of results, visual support, ability to ask questions, privacy of results location and managing expectations.Verbal communication methods (telephone and in-person) were preferred and facilitated greater understanding than written methods, although there was considerable variability in attendee preferences. Findings for anxiety were mixed, with no clear consensus on which method of communication might minimise attendee anxiety.The low number of identified studies and generally low quality evidence suggest we do not know the most appropriate communication methods in the delivery of cancer screening results. More research is needed to directly compare methods of results communication, focusing on what impact each method may have on screening attendees.",
keywords = "Communication, Mass screening, Mixed methods, Psychology, Review",
author = "Sian Williamson and Jacoby Patterson and Rebecca Crosby and Rebecca Johnson and Harbinder Sandhu and Samantha Johnson and Jacquie Jenkins and Margaret Casey and Olive Kearins and {Taylor Phillips}, Sian",
note = "This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.12.016",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "189--195",
journal = "Preventive Medicine Reports",
issn = "2211-3355",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Communication of cancer screening results by letter, telephone or in person: A mixed methods systematic review of the effect on attendee anxiety, understanding and preferences

AU - Williamson, Sian

AU - Patterson, Jacoby

AU - Crosby, Rebecca

AU - Johnson, Rebecca

AU - Sandhu, Harbinder

AU - Johnson, Samantha

AU - Jenkins, Jacquie

AU - Casey, Margaret

AU - Kearins, Olive

AU - Taylor Phillips, Sian

N1 - This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).

PY - 2019/3

Y1 - 2019/3

N2 - Attending and receiving a result from screening can be an anxious process. Using an appropriate method to deliver screening results could improve communication and reduce negative outcomes for screening attendees.Screening programmes are increasingly communicating results by letter or telephone rather than in-person. We investigated the impact of communication methods on attendees. We systematically reviewed the literature on the communication methods used to deliver results in cancer screening programmes for women, focusing on screening attendee anxiety, understanding of results and preferences for results communication. We included qualitative and quantitative research. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Embase. Results were analysed using framework synthesis. 10,558 papers were identified with seven studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Several key ideas emerged from the synthesis including speed, accuracy of results, visual support, ability to ask questions, privacy of results location and managing expectations.Verbal communication methods (telephone and in-person) were preferred and facilitated greater understanding than written methods, although there was considerable variability in attendee preferences. Findings for anxiety were mixed, with no clear consensus on which method of communication might minimise attendee anxiety.The low number of identified studies and generally low quality evidence suggest we do not know the most appropriate communication methods in the delivery of cancer screening results. More research is needed to directly compare methods of results communication, focusing on what impact each method may have on screening attendees.

AB - Attending and receiving a result from screening can be an anxious process. Using an appropriate method to deliver screening results could improve communication and reduce negative outcomes for screening attendees.Screening programmes are increasingly communicating results by letter or telephone rather than in-person. We investigated the impact of communication methods on attendees. We systematically reviewed the literature on the communication methods used to deliver results in cancer screening programmes for women, focusing on screening attendee anxiety, understanding of results and preferences for results communication. We included qualitative and quantitative research. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Embase. Results were analysed using framework synthesis. 10,558 papers were identified with seven studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Several key ideas emerged from the synthesis including speed, accuracy of results, visual support, ability to ask questions, privacy of results location and managing expectations.Verbal communication methods (telephone and in-person) were preferred and facilitated greater understanding than written methods, although there was considerable variability in attendee preferences. Findings for anxiety were mixed, with no clear consensus on which method of communication might minimise attendee anxiety.The low number of identified studies and generally low quality evidence suggest we do not know the most appropriate communication methods in the delivery of cancer screening results. More research is needed to directly compare methods of results communication, focusing on what impact each method may have on screening attendees.

KW - Communication

KW - Mass screening

KW - Mixed methods

KW - Psychology

KW - Review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059818920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.12.016

DO - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.12.016

M3 - Review article

VL - 13

SP - 189

EP - 195

JO - Preventive Medicine Reports

JF - Preventive Medicine Reports

SN - 2211-3355

ER -