Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research 2008, 27:75 http://www.jeccr.com/content/27/1/75 Table 2: Psychological characteristics Anxiety Depression Real cohesion Real adaptability Ideal cohesion Ideal adaptability Real dissatisfaction Ideal dissatisfaction Number of relatives affected by cancer Cancer Risk Perception Genetic Risk Perception Risk Perception of developing breast and ovarian cancer The mean percentage of risk perception of developing cancer is 49.8%. The score was correlated positively with the number of children (p = 0.01 r = 0.371) and with the level of anxiety (p = 0.07 r = 0.274). 25% of the subjects could give no indication of their risk perception of devel- oping breast/ovarian cancer. Risk perception of being a carrier of the genetic mutation The mean percentage of risk perception of being a carrier of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation shown is 46.7%. this score was positively correlated with the number of chil- dren (p > 0.04 r = 0.338) and level of anxiety (p = 0.04 r = 0.332), and 26,7% of subjects could give no indication of their perception of risk of being a carrier of genetic muta- tion predisposing one to breast/ovarian cancer. Anxiety and Depression The mean total score obtained from the HAD scale is within the cut off for adaptation disorders (13.9). In 46.4% of subjects there were no signs of anxiety or depres- sion, the rest of the sample showed an equal distribution between a major depressive episode (26.8%) and adapta- tion disorders (26.8%). In each scale there was an average score of 8.3 (borderline anxiety) and 5.6 (normal depres- sion). The borderline anxiety level was 30.4%, anxiety disorders 25%, depressive disorders 12.5% and the same percentage of subjects had a borderline level of depression. The score for the single scale of anxiety correlated with the number of children (p = 0.001 r = 0.421). Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale (FACES III) The average score of true and ideal cohesion were 39.7 (separated families) and 42.1 (connected families), respectively. The mean index of family dissatisfaction for cohesion was -2.35 (negative sign indicates a general ten- Mean Median St Deviation 7,9 5,1 39,7 30,0 42,1 34,5 -2.3 -4.5 3,9 38,9 39,9 7,0 4,0 40,0 30,0 42,0 35,0 -2.0 -5,0 3,0 46,0 50,0 3,7 3,5 7,4 7,1 6,0 5,7 8,1 7,8 3,2 23,8 23,1 Range 0–16 0–15 11–53 15–50 22–50 17–46 (-25)–(+24) (-22)–(+18) 0–13 0–100* 0–86.8** dency for family members to want closer emotional ties). The average of true and ideal adaptability was 30.1 and 34.5 (range of chaotic families for both values) The aver- age index of family dissatisfaction with adaptability was - 4.50 (negative score indicates the desire for change towards greater structuring of rules/roles between family members). A third of the families were considered to be extreme 30%, mid-range 59%, and balanced only 11%. Reasons for discontinuing genetic counselling, and associations between socio-demographic, medical and psychological variables. (Table 3) One of the reasons given for discontinuing counselling as reported by 48% of the subjects is the fear of the conse- quences for their family brought about by the results of the genetic test. In particular, 32% believed it was not right to involve their family. The same percentage of sub- jects, did not feel they could pass on negative information to their family, and 9% of subjects felt guilty towards their family members. Amongst the counselees who claimed their partner to be against genetic testing, 5.4% harboured a level of genetic risk perception, significantly lower (p = 0.002) compared to the rest of the sample. Forty-three percent of counselees showed fear arising from the stress of hospital visits as their reason for discontinuing the counselling, a further 43% the fear of knowing that they had a high risk of developing cancer and 18% felt they would not be able to confront the idea of frequent pre- ventative clinical surveillance if they were found to be mutation carriers. This latter data was reported principally by subjects affected by cancer and answered 'true' to this item, significantly more than healthy subjects(p = 0.047). Thirty four percent of subjects stated that they did not have the time to attend the visits required for counselling, this reason was given by significantly more single, divorced or widowed women compared to married women (p = 0.048). Thirty seven percent claimed that the distance between the hospital and their home was the rea- Page 4 of 8 (page number not for citation purposes)