Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Archives of Osteoporosis 1/2014

01.12.2014 | Original Article

Women’s perspectives and experiences on screening for osteoporosis (Risk-stratified Osteoporosis Strategy Evaluation, ROSE)

verfasst von: Mette Juel Rothmann, Lotte Huniche, Jette Ammentorp, Reinhard Barkmann, Claus C. Glüer, Anne Pernille Hermann

Erschienen in: Archives of Osteoporosis | Ausgabe 1/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Summary

This study aimed to investigate women’s perspectives and experiences with screening for osteoporosis. Focus groups and individual interviews were conducted. Three main themes emerged: knowledge about osteoporosis, psychological aspects of screening, and moral duty. Generally, screening was accepted due to life experiences, self-perceived risk, and the preventive nature of screening.

Purpose

The risk-stratified osteoporosis strategy evaluation (ROSE) study is a randomized prospective population-based trial investigating the efficacy of a screening program to prevent fractures in women aged 65–80 years. It is recommended by the World Health Organization that a set of criteria are met before a screening program is implemented. This sub-study aims to investigate women’s perspectives and experiences with the ROSE screening program in relation to the patient-related criteria recommended by the World Health Organization.

Methods

A qualitative study was carried out involving 31 women by way of 8 focus group interviews and 11 individual interviews. Principles from critical psychology guided the analysis.

Results

Women’s perspectives and experiences with the screening program were described by three main themes: knowledge about osteoporosis, psychological aspects of screening, and moral duty. The women viewed the program in the context of their everyday life and life trajectories. Age, lifestyle, and knowledge about osteoporosis were important to how women ascribed meaning to the program, how they viewed the possibilities and limitations, and how they rationalized their actions and choices. The women displayed limited knowledge about osteoporosis and its risk factors. However, acceptance was based on prior experience, perceived risk, and evaluation of preventive measures. To be reassured or concerned by screening was described as important issues, as well as the responsibility for health-seeking behaviour.

Conclusion

In general, the women accepted the screening program. No major ethical reservations or adverse psychological consequences were detected. Only a minority of women declined screening participation due to a low perceived risk of osteoporosis.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Brodersen J, Jorgensen KJ, Gotzsche PC (2010) The benefits and harms of screening for cancer with a focus on breast screening. Pol Arch Med Wewn 120:89–94PubMed Brodersen J, Jorgensen KJ, Gotzsche PC (2010) The benefits and harms of screening for cancer with a focus on breast screening. Pol Arch Med Wewn 120:89–94PubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilson JM, Jungner YG (1968) Principles and practice of mass screening for disease. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam 65:281–393PubMed Wilson JM, Jungner YG (1968) Principles and practice of mass screening for disease. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam 65:281–393PubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Beauchamp S, Dery V (2008) Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bull World Health Organ 86:317–319PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Beauchamp S, Dery V (2008) Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bull World Health Organ 86:317–319PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hugod C, Alban A, Dehlholm G, Fog J, Hørder M, Lynge E, Olesen F, Olsen J, Møller-Pedersen K, Worm-Petersen J (1990) Screening hvorfor—hvornår—hvordan Hugod C, Alban A, Dehlholm G, Fog J, Hørder M, Lynge E, Olesen F, Olsen J, Møller-Pedersen K, Worm-Petersen J (1990) Screening hvorfor—hvornår—hvordan
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Vestergaard P, Rejnmark L, Mosekilde L (2005) Osteoporosis is markedly underdiagnosed: a nationwide study from Denmark. Osteoporos Int 16:134–141PubMedCrossRef Vestergaard P, Rejnmark L, Mosekilde L (2005) Osteoporosis is markedly underdiagnosed: a nationwide study from Denmark. Osteoporos Int 16:134–141PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnell O, Kanis J (2005) Epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 16(Suppl 2):S3–S7PubMedCrossRef Johnell O, Kanis J (2005) Epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 16(Suppl 2):S3–S7PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Kanis JA, Johnell O, De LC, Johansson H, Oden A, Delmas P, Eisman J, Fujiwara S, Garnero P, Kroger H, McCloskey EV, Mellstrom D, Melton LJ, Pols H, Reeve J, Silman A, Tenenhouse A (2004) A meta-analysis of previous fracture and subsequent fracture risk. Bone 35:375–382PubMedCrossRef Kanis JA, Johnell O, De LC, Johansson H, Oden A, Delmas P, Eisman J, Fujiwara S, Garnero P, Kroger H, McCloskey EV, Mellstrom D, Melton LJ, Pols H, Reeve J, Silman A, Tenenhouse A (2004) A meta-analysis of previous fracture and subsequent fracture risk. Bone 35:375–382PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Mossey JM, Mutran E, Knott K, Craik R (1989) Determinants of recovery 12 months after hip fracture: the importance of psychosocial factors. Am J Public Health 79:279–286PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Mossey JM, Mutran E, Knott K, Craik R (1989) Determinants of recovery 12 months after hip fracture: the importance of psychosocial factors. Am J Public Health 79:279–286PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Strom O, Borgstrom F, Kanis JA, Compston J, Cooper C, McCloskey EV, Jonsson B (2011) Osteoporosis: burden, health care provision and opportunities in the EU: a report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA). Arch Osteoporos 6:59–155PubMedCrossRef Strom O, Borgstrom F, Kanis JA, Compston J, Cooper C, McCloskey EV, Jonsson B (2011) Osteoporosis: burden, health care provision and opportunities in the EU: a report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA). Arch Osteoporos 6:59–155PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Papaioannou A, Kennedy CC, Ioannidis G, Brown JP, Pathak A, Hanley DA, Josse RG, Sebaldt RJ, Olszynski WP, Tenenhouse A, Murray TM, Petrie A, Goldsmith CH, Adachi JD (2006) Determinants of health-related quality of life in women with vertebral fractures. Osteoporos Int 17:355–363PubMedCrossRef Papaioannou A, Kennedy CC, Ioannidis G, Brown JP, Pathak A, Hanley DA, Josse RG, Sebaldt RJ, Olszynski WP, Tenenhouse A, Murray TM, Petrie A, Goldsmith CH, Adachi JD (2006) Determinants of health-related quality of life in women with vertebral fractures. Osteoporos Int 17:355–363PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Petrella RJ, Payne M, Myers A, Overend T, Chesworth B (2000) Physical function and fear of falling after hip fracture rehabilitation in the elderly. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 79:154–160PubMedCrossRef Petrella RJ, Payne M, Myers A, Overend T, Chesworth B (2000) Physical function and fear of falling after hip fracture rehabilitation in the elderly. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 79:154–160PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Vestergaard P, Rejnmark L, Mosekilde L (2007) Increased mortality in patients with a hip fracture-effect of pre-morbid conditions and post-fracture complications. Osteoporos Int 18:1583–1593PubMedCrossRef Vestergaard P, Rejnmark L, Mosekilde L (2007) Increased mortality in patients with a hip fracture-effect of pre-morbid conditions and post-fracture complications. Osteoporos Int 18:1583–1593PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Murad MH, Drake MT, Mullan RJ, Mauck KF, Stuart LM, Lane MA, Abu Elnour NO, Erwin PJ, Hazem A, Puhan MA, Li T, Montori VM (2012) Clinical review. Comparative effectiveness of drug treatments to prevent fragility fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 97:1871–1880PubMedCrossRef Murad MH, Drake MT, Mullan RJ, Mauck KF, Stuart LM, Lane MA, Abu Elnour NO, Erwin PJ, Hazem A, Puhan MA, Li T, Montori VM (2012) Clinical review. Comparative effectiveness of drug treatments to prevent fragility fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 97:1871–1880PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Reventlow SD (2007) Perceived risk of osteoporosis: restricted physical activities? Qualitative interview study with women in their sixties. Scand J Prim Health Care 25:160–165PubMedCrossRef Reventlow SD (2007) Perceived risk of osteoporosis: restricted physical activities? Qualitative interview study with women in their sixties. Scand J Prim Health Care 25:160–165PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Weston JM, Norris EV, Clark EM (2011) The invisible disease: making sense of an osteoporosis diagnosis in older age. Qual Health Res 21:1692–1704PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Weston JM, Norris EV, Clark EM (2011) The invisible disease: making sense of an osteoporosis diagnosis in older age. Qual Health Res 21:1692–1704PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Reventlow S, Bang H (2006) Brittle bones: ageing or threat of disease exploring women’s cultural models of osteoporosis. Scand J Public Health 34:320–326PubMedCrossRef Reventlow S, Bang H (2006) Brittle bones: ageing or threat of disease exploring women’s cultural models of osteoporosis. Scand J Public Health 34:320–326PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Reventlow SD, Hvas L, Malterud K (2006) Making the invisible body visible. Bone scans, osteoporosis and women’s bodily experiences. Soc Sci Med 62:2720–2731PubMedCrossRef Reventlow SD, Hvas L, Malterud K (2006) Making the invisible body visible. Bone scans, osteoporosis and women’s bodily experiences. Soc Sci Med 62:2720–2731PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Kanis JA, Johansson H, Oden A, McCloskey EV (2009) Assessment of fracture risk. Eur J Radiol 71:392–397PubMedCrossRef Kanis JA, Johansson H, Oden A, McCloskey EV (2009) Assessment of fracture risk. Eur J Radiol 71:392–397PubMedCrossRef
19.
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Maxwell J (2005) Qualitative research design. An interactive approach Maxwell J (2005) Qualitative research design. An interactive approach
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Morgan D (1997) Focus group as qualitative research. 2nd edn Morgan D (1997) Focus group as qualitative research. 2nd edn
22.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN, Rook DW (2007) Focus groups theory and practice. 2nd edn Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN, Rook DW (2007) Focus groups theory and practice. 2nd edn
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Mørck LL, Huniche L (2006) Critical psychology in Danish context. Annual review of Critical Psychology:1–9 Mørck LL, Huniche L (2006) Critical psychology in Danish context. Annual review of Critical Psychology:1–9
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Dreier O (2008) Psychotherapy in everyday life Dreier O (2008) Psychotherapy in everyday life
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Jartoft V (1996) Kritisk psykologi en psykologi med fokus på subjektivitet og handling Jartoft V (1996) Kritisk psykologi en psykologi med fokus på subjektivitet og handling
27.
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Sujic R, Gignac MA, Cockerill R, Beaton DE (2011) A review of patient-centred post-fracture interventions in the context of theories of health behaviour change. Osteoporos Int 22:2213–2224PubMedCrossRef Sujic R, Gignac MA, Cockerill R, Beaton DE (2011) A review of patient-centred post-fracture interventions in the context of theories of health behaviour change. Osteoporos Int 22:2213–2224PubMedCrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH (1988) Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Educ Q 15(2):175–183PubMedCrossRef Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH (1988) Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Educ Q 15(2):175–183PubMedCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Clarke LH, Griffin M (2008) Failing bodies: body image and multiple chronic conditions in later life. Qual Health Res 18:1084–1095PubMedCrossRef Clarke LH, Griffin M (2008) Failing bodies: body image and multiple chronic conditions in later life. Qual Health Res 18:1084–1095PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Giangregorio L, Papaioannou A, Thabane L, Debeer J, Cranney A, Dolovich L, Adili A, Adachi JD (2008) Do patients perceive a link between a fragility fracture and osteoporosis? BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:38PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Giangregorio L, Papaioannou A, Thabane L, Debeer J, Cranney A, Dolovich L, Adili A, Adachi JD (2008) Do patients perceive a link between a fragility fracture and osteoporosis? BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:38PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Gerend MA, Erchull MJ, Aiken LS, Maner JK (2006) Reasons and risk: factors underlying women’s perceptions of susceptibility to osteoporosis. Maturitas 55:227–237PubMedCrossRef Gerend MA, Erchull MJ, Aiken LS, Maner JK (2006) Reasons and risk: factors underlying women’s perceptions of susceptibility to osteoporosis. Maturitas 55:227–237PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Meadows LM, Mrkonjic LA, Lagendyk LE, Petersen KM (2004) After the fall: women’s views of fractures in relation to bone health at midlife. Women Health 39:47–62PubMedCrossRef Meadows LM, Mrkonjic LA, Lagendyk LE, Petersen KM (2004) After the fall: women’s views of fractures in relation to bone health at midlife. Women Health 39:47–62PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Rimes KA, Salkovskis PM (2002) Prediction of psychological reactions to bone density screening for osteoporosis using a cognitive-behavioral model of health anxiety. Behav Res Ther 40:359–381PubMedCrossRef Rimes KA, Salkovskis PM (2002) Prediction of psychological reactions to bone density screening for osteoporosis using a cognitive-behavioral model of health anxiety. Behav Res Ther 40:359–381PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Malterud K (2005) Qualitative methods in medical research—conditions, possibilities and challenges. Ugeskr Laeger 167:2377–2380PubMed Malterud K (2005) Qualitative methods in medical research—conditions, possibilities and challenges. Ugeskr Laeger 167:2377–2380PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Women’s perspectives and experiences on screening for osteoporosis (Risk-stratified Osteoporosis Strategy Evaluation, ROSE)
verfasst von
Mette Juel Rothmann
Lotte Huniche
Jette Ammentorp
Reinhard Barkmann
Claus C. Glüer
Anne Pernille Hermann
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2014
Verlag
Springer London
Erschienen in
Archives of Osteoporosis / Ausgabe 1/2014
Print ISSN: 1862-3522
Elektronische ISSN: 1862-3514
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-014-0192-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2014

Archives of Osteoporosis 1/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.