Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2007 Sep 8;335(7618):486.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39303.723449.55. Epub 2007 Aug 30.

Psychological impact of screening for type 2 diabetes: controlled trial and comparative study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Psychological impact of screening for type 2 diabetes: controlled trial and comparative study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial

Helen C Eborall et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To quantify the psychological impact of primary care based stepwise screening for type 2 diabetes.

Design: Controlled trial and comparative study embedded in a randomised controlled trial.

Setting: 15 practices (10 screening, five control) in the ADDITION (Cambridge) trial in the east of England.

Participants: 7380 adults (aged 40-69) in the top fourth for risk of having undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (6416 invited for screening, 964 controls).

Interventions: Invited for screening for type 2 diabetes or not invited (controls), incorporating a comparative study of subgroups of screening attenders. Attenders completed questionnaires after a random blood glucose test and at 3-6 months and 12-15 months later. Controls were sent questionnaires at corresponding time points. Non-attenders were sent questionnaires at 3-6 months and 12-15 months.

Main outcome measures: State anxiety (Spielberger state anxiety inventory), anxiety and depression (hospital anxiety and depression scale), worry about diabetes, and self rated health.

Results: No significant differences were found between the screening and control participants at any time-for example, difference in means (95% confidence intervals) for state anxiety after the initial blood glucose test was -0.53, -2.60 to 1.54, at 3-6 months was 1.51 (-0.17 to 3.20), and at 12-15 months was 0.57, -1.11 to 2.24. After the initial test, compared with participants who screened negative, those who screened positive reported significantly poorer general health (difference in means -0.19, -0.25 to -0.13), higher state anxiety (0.93, -0.02 to 1.88), higher depression (0.32, 0.08 to 0.56), and higher worry about diabetes (0.25, 0.09 to 0.41), although effect sizes were small. Small but significant trends were found for self rated health across the screening subgroups at 3-6 months (P=0.047) and for worry about diabetes across the screen negative groups at 3-6 months and 12-15 months (P=0.001).

Conclusions: Screening for type 2 diabetes has limited psychological impact on patients. Implementing a national screening programme based on the stepwise screening procedure used in the ADDITION (Cambridge) trial is unlikely to have significant consequences for patients' psychological health.

Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99175498 [controlled-trials.com].

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

None
Flow of participants through screening programme, with questionnaire response rates at each time point

Comment in

  • Screening for diabetes.
    Stolk RP. Stolk RP. BMJ. 2007 Sep 8;335(7618):457-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39323.395336.BE. Epub 2007 Aug 30. BMJ. 2007. PMID: 17761997 Free PMC article.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Nabarro JDN. Diabetes in the United Kingdom: some facts and figures. Diabet Med 1988;5:816-22. - PubMed
    1. Wareham NJ, Griffin SJ. Should we screen for type 2 diabetes? Evaluation against national screening committee criteria. BMJ 2001;322:986-8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stewart-Brown S, Farmer A. Screening could seriously damage your health. BMJ 1997;314:533. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shaw C, Abrams K, Marteau TM. Psychological impact of predicting individuals' risks of illness: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med 1999;49:1571-98. - PubMed
    1. French DP, Maissi E, Marteau TM. Psychological costs of inadequate cervical smear test results. Br J Cancer 2004;91:1887-92. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data