Literature DB >> 16080181

Treatment decision-making strategies and influences in patients with localized prostate carcinoma.

Clement K Gwede1, Julio Pow-Sang, John Seigne, Randy Heysek, Mohamed Helal, Kristin Shade, Alan Cantor, Paul B Jacobsen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with localized prostate carcinoma need to interpret complicated medical information to make an informed treatment selection from among treatments that have comparable efficacy but differing side effects. The authors reported initial results for treatment decision-making strategies among men receiving definitive treatment for localized prostate carcinoma.
METHODS: One hundred nineteen men treated with radical prostatectomy (44%) or brachytherapy (56%) consented to participate. Guided by a cognitive-affective theoretic framework, the authors assessed differences in decision-making strategies, and treatment and disease-relevant beliefs and affects, in addition to demographic and clinical variables.
RESULTS: Approximately half of patients reported difficulty (49%) and distress (45%) while making treatment decisions, but no regrets (74%) regarding the treatment choice they made. Patients who underwent prostatectomy were younger, were more likely to be employed, had worse tumor grade, and had a shorter time since diagnosis (P < 0.01) compared with patients who did not undergo prostatectomy. In multivariate analyses, compared with patients who received radical prostatectomy, patients who received brachytherapy were more likely to say that they chose this treatment because it was "the least invasive" and they "wanted to avoid surgery" (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In general, patients who received brachytherapy chose this treatment because of quality of life considerations, whereas "cure" and complete removal of the tumor were the main motivations for patients selecting radical prostatectomy. Long-term data are needed to evaluate distress and decisional regret as patients experience treatment-related chronic side effects and efficacy outcomes. Decision-making aids or other interventions to reduce decisional difficulty and emotional distress during decision making were indicated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16080181     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.21330

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  38 in total

Review 1.  Developing effective cancer pain education programs.

Authors:  Michelle Y Martin; Maria Pisu; Elizabeth A Kvale; Shelley A Johns
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2012-08

Review 2.  The decision-related psychosocial concerns of men with localised prostate cancer: targets for intervention and research.

Authors:  Suzanne K Steginga; Emma Turner; Jenny Donovan
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-06-12       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  The association between race and treatment regret among men with recurrent prostate cancer.

Authors:  B A Mahal; M-H Chen; C L Bennett; M W Kattan; O Sartor; K Stein; A V D'Amico; P L Nguyen
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 5.554

4.  [Elderly prostate cancer patients: patient information and shared decision making].

Authors:  N Ernstmann; J Jaeger; C Kowalski; H Pfaff; L Weißbach
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  What Is a "Good" Treatment Decision? Decisional Control, Knowledge, Treatment Decision Making, and Quality of Life in Men with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Heather Orom; Caitlin Biddle; Willie Underwood; Christian J Nelson; D Lynn Homish
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Personality predicts prostate cancer treatment decision-making difficulty and satisfaction.

Authors:  Heather Orom; Louis A Penner; Brady T West; Tracy M Downs; Walter Rayford; Willie Underwood
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.894

7.  Current impact of age and comorbidity assessment on prostate cancer treatment choice and over/undertreatment risk.

Authors:  Pierre Lunardi; Guillaume Ploussard; Pascale Grosclaude; Mathieu Roumiguié; Michel Soulié; Jean Baptiste Beauval; Bernard Malavaud
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  The Physician Recommendation Coding System (PhyReCS): A Reliable and Valid Method to Quantify the Strength of Physician Recommendations During Clinical Encounters.

Authors:  Karen A Scherr; Angela Fagerlin; Lillie D Williamson; J Kelly Davis; Ilona Fridman; Natalie Atyeo; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  "It's not like I can change my mind later": reversibility and decision timing in prostate cancer treatment decision-making.

Authors:  Nora B Henrikson; William J Ellis; Donna L Berry
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-04-21

10.  Patient preference and the impact of decision-making aids on prostate cancer treatment choices and post-intervention regret.

Authors:  J J Aning; R J Wassersug; S L Goldenberg
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.677

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.