Abstract
Purpose
Scan-associated anxiety (‘scanxiety’) in people with advanced cancer is a common clinical problem. This study aims to explore the experiences of scans and scanxiety in people with advanced cancer, including their strategies to reduce scanxiety.
Methods
Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with people with advanced cancers who had a computed tomography scan for monitoring of their cancer. Data was analysed with an interpretivist approach using framework analysis.
Results
Interviews with 16 participants identified three key themes: the scan experience, the scanxiety experience and coping with scans. Scans were viewed as a routine and normal part of cancer care. Scanxiety was experienced differently by each person. Scanxiety often related to the scan result rather than the scan and led to psycho-cognitive manifestations. Adaptive coping strategies were often self-derived.
Conclusion
People with advanced cancer experience scanxiety, but often accept scanxiety as a normal part of the cancer process. The findings fit within a transactional model of stress and coping, which influences the level of scanxiety for each individual. Quantitative research to determine the scope of scanxiety will be useful to develop formal approaches to reduce scanxiety.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Data from this study is available from Kim Tam Bui upon reasonable request.
Code availability
Not applicable.
References
Feiler B (2011) Scanxiety. Time 177. http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2075133_2075127_2075107,00.html
Mathers SA, McKenzie GA, Robertson EM (2011) A necessary evil: the experiences of men with prostate cancer undergoing imaging procedures. Radiography 17(4):284–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2011.06.005
Truesdale-Kennedy M, Taggart L, McIlfatrick S (2011) Breast cancer knowledge among women with intellectual disabilities and their experiences of receiving breast mammography. J Adv Nurs 67(6):1294–1304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05595.x
Strand T, Törnqvist E, Rask M, Roxberg Å (2014) The experience of patients with neoplasm metastasis in the spine during a magnetic resonance imaging examination. J Radiol Nurs 33(4):191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jradnu.2014.09.001
Brandzel S, Rosenberg DE, Johnson D, Bush M, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Henderson L, Nekhlyudov L, DeMartini W, Wernli KJ (2017) Women’s experiences and preferences regarding breast imaging after completing breast cancer treatment. Patient Prefer Adherence 11:199–204. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S122244
Evans R, Taylor S, Janes S, Halligan S, Morton A, Navani N, Oliver A, Rockall A, Teague J, Miles A, Streamline trials i (2017) Patient experience and perceived acceptability of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for staging colorectal and lung cancer compared with current staging scans: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 7(9):e016391. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016391
Bui KT, Liang R, Kiely BE, Brown C, Dhillon HM, Blinman P (2021) Scanxiety: a scoping review about scan-associated anxiety. BMJ Open 11(5):e043215. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043215
Thorne S (2016) Interpretive description: qualitative research for applied practice. Developing Qualitative Inquiry, Second edition edn. Routledge, New York
Ritchie J, Lewis J (2003) Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. Sage Publications, London
Gale N, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S (2013) Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 13:117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
Lazarus RS, Folkman S (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Pub. Co., New York
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the contributions of patients involved in this study from Concord Repatriation General Hospital and the support from the Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Interviews were conducted and transcribed by KTB. HMD reviewed recordings and transcripts throughout interview phase. Initial data analysis was performed independently by KTB and HMD, with final themes determined in collaboration with PB and BEK. The manuscript was written KTB, and all authors reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
This study was approved by the Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee – Concord Repatriation General Hospital (2019/ETH8007). The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Reporting followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement.
Consent to participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Conflict of interests
Financial interests: BEK reports receipt of honoraria for advisory boards and educational presentations as well as travel and meeting expenses from Roche; and receipt of honoraria for educational presentations from Novartis. HMD reports honoraria paid to their institution for educational presentations from MSD and BMS and advisory board by MSD. KTB, PB and CB declare they have no relevant financial interests to disclose. Non-financial interests: All authors declare they have no non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bui, K.T., Blinman, P., Kiely, B.E. et al. Experiences with scans and scanxiety in people with advanced cancer: a qualitative study. Support Care Cancer 29, 7441–7449 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06319-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06319-1