Suppr超能文献

如何最好地教授女性乳房自我检查。一项随机对照试验。

How best to teach women breast self-examination. A randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Fletcher S W, O'Malley M S, Earp J L, Morgan T M, Lin S, Degnan D

机构信息

School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 1990 May 15;112(10):772-9. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-112-10-772.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare three methods for teaching breast self-examination.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial with factorial design.

SETTING

A general medicine group practice in a university hospital.

PATIENTS

Continuing-care patients from 40 to 68 years of age. Of 456 eligible women, 156 refused participation, 300 were randomly assigned, 269 completed assigned interventions, and 260 completed the post-test 1 year later.

INTERVENTIONS

One third of patients received nurse instruction stressing tactile skills (Mammacare group) (Mammatech Corporation, Gainesville, Florida); one third, traditional nurse instruction emphasizing technique (traditional group); and one third, no nurse instruction (control group). Half of each group received physician encouragement.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One year later, women in the Mammacare group found more lumps (mean, 57%; 95% CI, 54% to 60%) in manufactured breast models than did those in the traditional (mean, 47%; CI, 44% to 51%) and control (mean, 45%; CI, 42% to 48%) groups. Lump detection specificity was unaffected. Self-reported examination frequency rose in all groups, to 5.1 times per 6 months in the traditional group, 4.2 in the Mammacare group, and 3.9 in the control group. Physician encouragement did not improve sensitivity, specificity, or overall frequency. Women in the Mammacare group used more of seven examination techniques (4.9) than did those in the traditional (3.9) or control (3.2) groups (P less than 0.001). No group increased health care use or reported more overall worry about breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Mammacare instruction resulted in more long-term improved lump detection and examination technique use than did traditional instruction or physician encouragement. Breast self-examination instruction should emphasize lump detection skills.

摘要

目的

比较三种乳腺自我检查的教学方法。

设计

采用析因设计的随机对照试验。

地点

大学医院的普通内科门诊。

患者

年龄在40至68岁的持续护理患者。456名符合条件的女性中,156人拒绝参与,300人被随机分组,269人完成了指定干预,260人在1年后完成了后测。

干预措施

三分之一的患者接受强调触觉技能的护士指导(Mammacare组)(Mammatech公司,佛罗里达州盖恩斯维尔);三分之一接受强调技术的传统护士指导(传统组);三分之一不接受护士指导(对照组)。每组中有一半的患者得到医生的鼓励。

测量指标及主要结果

1年后,Mammacare组女性在人造乳房模型中发现的肿块比传统组(平均47%;95%置信区间,44%至51%)和对照组(平均45%;置信区间,42%至48%)更多(平均57%;95%置信区间,54%至60%)。肿块检测的特异性未受影响。所有组自我报告的检查频率均有所上升,传统组每6个月为5.1次,Mammacare组为4.2次,对照组为3.9次。医生的鼓励并未提高敏感性、特异性或总体检查频率。Mammacare组女性使用的七种检查技术(4.9种)比传统组(3.9种)和对照组(3.2种)更多(P<0.001)。没有一组增加医疗保健的使用或报告对乳腺癌有更多的总体担忧。

结论

与传统指导或医生鼓励相比,Mammacare指导能带来更长期的肿块检测改善和检查技术使用增加。乳腺自我检查指导应强调肿块检测技能。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验