Literature DB >> 11422636

The evaluation of two methods to facilitate shared decision making for men considering the prostate-specific antigen test.

D L Frosch1, R M Kaplan, V Felitti.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: California law (Grant H. Kenyon Prostate Cancer Detection Act) requires physicians to inform all patients older than aged 50 years who receive a prostate examination about the availability of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Physicians are not given guidance on how this information should be presented. We sought to evaluate the effects upon PSA screening rates of informing patients about PSA testing by 2 different techniques.
DESIGN: Factorial comparison of discussion versus video formats for presenting information about the PSA test.
SETTING: Patients were recruited through the Health Appraisal screening program in the Department for Preventive Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, Calif. PARTICIPANTS: Male patients undergoing health appraisal screening participated in 1 of 4 groups providing information about PSA screening: usual care ( n=43), discussion about risks and benefits of PSA ( n=45), shared decision-making video ( n=46), or video plus discussion ( n=42). Participants were sequentially assigned to 1 of the 4 groups.
RESULTS: No significant differences in demographics or family history was demonstrated between the groups at the time of group assignment. Participants in the intervention groups rated the information as clear, balanced, and fair. There were significant differences in the number of men requesting a PSA test, with the highest rate in the usual care group (97.7%), followed by discussion (82.2%), video (60.0%), and video plus discussion (50.0%).
CONCLUSION: Providing information about PSA screening in the form of video or discussion is feasible and significantly alters PSA screening rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11422636      PMCID: PMC1495230          DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016006391.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  12 in total

1.  Development of a decision aid for atrial fibrillation who are considering antithrombotic therapy.

Authors:  M Man-Son-Hing; A Laupacis; A M O'Connor; R G Hart; G Feldman; J L Blackshear; D C Anderson
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing as screening for prostate cancer: the current controversy.

Authors:  P Boyle
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 3.  PSA screening for prostate cancer: the current controversy--a viewpoint. Patient Outcomes Research Team for Prostatic Diseases.

Authors:  M J Barry
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  Fifteen-year survival in prostate cancer. A prospective, population-based study in Sweden.

Authors:  J E Johansson; L Holmberg; S Johansson; R Bergström; H O Adami
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-02-12       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease.

Authors:  M W Morgan; R B Deber; H A Llewellyn-Thomas; P Gladstone; R J Cusimano; K O'Rourke; G Tomlinson; A S Detsky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 6.  Shared decision making in clinical medicine: past research and future directions.

Authors:  D L Frosch; R M Kaplan
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 5.043

7.  The importance of patient preference in the decision to screen for prostate cancer. Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team.

Authors:  A B Flood; J E Wennberg; R F Nease; F J Fowler; J Ding; L M Hynes
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Patient reactions to a program designed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decisions for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Authors:  M J Barry; F J Fowler; A G Mulley; J V Henderson; J E Wennberg
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Developing shared decision-making programs to improve the quality of health care.

Authors:  J F Kasper; A G Mulley; J E Wennberg
Journal:  QRB Qual Rev Bull       Date:  1992-06

10.  Shared medical decision-making: a new paradigm for behavioral medicine--1997 presidential address.

Authors:  R M Kaplan
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  1999
View more
  46 in total

1.  Prostate cancer and race: variation in diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Steven J Bernstein
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Low-literacy interventions to promote discussion of prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sunil Kripalani; Jyoti Sharma; Elizabeth Justice; Jeb Justice; Cynthia Spiker; Larry E Laufman; Megan Price; Armin D Weinberg; Terry A Jacobson
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.043

3.  Assessment of the use and feasibility of video to supplement the genetic counseling process: a cancer genetic counseling perspective.

Authors:  J E Axilbund; L A Hamby; D B Thompson; S J Olsen; C A Griffin
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial for PSA Screening Decision Support Interventions in Two Primary Care Settings.

Authors:  Carmen L Lewis; Jared Adams; Ming Tai-Seale; Qiwen Huang; Sarah B Knowles; Matthew E Nielsen; Michael P Pignone; Louise C Walter; Dominick L Frosch
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Should Canadians be offered systematic prostate cancer screening? No.

Authors:  Michel Labrecque; France Légaré; Michel Cauchon
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  The global role of health care delivery science: learning from variation to build health systems that avoid waste and harm.

Authors:  Albert G Mulley
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Perceived ambiguity about cancer prevention recommendations: associations with cancer-related perceptions and behaviours in a US population survey.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Richard P Moser; William M P Klein
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Conducting implementation research in community-based primary care: a qualitative study on integrating patient decision support interventions for cancer screening into routine practice.

Authors:  Dominick L Frosch; Kirsty J Singer; Stefan Timmermans
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors.

Authors:  Melissa R Partin; David Nelson; David Radosevich; Sean Nugent; Ann B Flood; Nancy Dillon; Jeremy Holtzman; Michele Haas; Timothy J Wilt
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  A structured implicit abstraction method to evaluate whether content of counseling before prostate cancer screening is consistent with recommendations by experts.

Authors:  Michael H Farrell; Evelyn C Y Chan; Lynnea K Ladouceur; Jeffrey M Stein
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-10-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.