BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer is controversial, with concerning rates of both overscreening and underscreening. The reasons for the observed rates of screening are unknown, and few studies have examined the relationship of psychological health to PSA screening rates. Understanding this relationship can help guide interventions to improve informed decision-making for screening. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of men 57-85 years old without prostate cancer (N = 1169) from the National Social life, Health and Aging Project was analyzed. The independent relationship of validated psychological health scales measuring stress, anxiety, and depression to PSA testing rates was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: PSA screening rates were significantly lower for men with higher perceived stress [odds ratio (OR) = 0.76, P = 0.006], but not for higher depressive symptoms (OR = 0.89, P = 0.22) when accounting for stress. Anxiety influences PSA screening through an interaction with number of doctor visits (P = 0.02). Among the men who visited the doctor once those with higher anxiety were less likely to be screened (OR = 0.65, P = 0.04). Conversely, those who visited the doctor 10+ times with higher anxiety were more likely to be screened (OR = 1.71, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Perceived stress significantly lowers PSA screening likelihood, and it seems to partly mediate the negative relationship of depression with screening likelihood. Anxiety affects PSA screening rates differently for men with different numbers of doctor visits. Interventions to influence PSA screening rates should recognize the role of the patients' psychological state to improve their likelihood of making informed decisions and improve screening appropriateness.
BACKGROUND:Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer is controversial, with concerning rates of both overscreening and underscreening. The reasons for the observed rates of screening are unknown, and few studies have examined the relationship of psychological health to PSA screening rates. Understanding this relationship can help guide interventions to improve informed decision-making for screening. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of men 57-85 years old without prostate cancer (N = 1169) from the National Social life, Health and Aging Project was analyzed. The independent relationship of validated psychological health scales measuring stress, anxiety, and depression to PSA testing rates was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS:PSA screening rates were significantly lower for men with higher perceived stress [odds ratio (OR) = 0.76, P = 0.006], but not for higher depressive symptoms (OR = 0.89, P = 0.22) when accounting for stress. Anxiety influences PSA screening through an interaction with number of doctor visits (P = 0.02). Among the men who visited the doctor once those with higher anxiety were less likely to be screened (OR = 0.65, P = 0.04). Conversely, those who visited the doctor 10+ times with higher anxiety were more likely to be screened (OR = 1.71, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Perceived stress significantly lowers PSA screening likelihood, and it seems to partly mediate the negative relationship of depression with screening likelihood. Anxiety affects PSA screening rates differently for men with different numbers of doctor visits. Interventions to influence PSA screening rates should recognize the role of the patients' psychological state to improve their likelihood of making informed decisions and improve screening appropriateness.
Authors: E David Crawford; Robert Grubb; Amanda Black; Gerald L Andriole; Ming-Hui Chen; Grant Izmirlian; Christine D Berg; Anthony V D'Amico Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nathan S Consedine; Carol Magai; Yulia S Krivoshekova; Lynn Ryzewicz; Alfred I Neugut Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Andrea M Tavlarides; Steven C Ames; David D Thiel; Nancy N Diehl; Alexander S Parker Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2014-06-21 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Wendy Landier; Roderick Skinner; W Hamish Wallace; Lars Hjorth; Renée L Mulder; F Lennie Wong; Yutaka Yasui; Nickhill Bhakta; Louis S Constine; Smita Bhatia; Leontien C Kremer; Melissa M Hudson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Visalini Nair-Shalliker; Albert Bang; Marianne Weber; David E Goldsbury; Michael Caruana; Jon Emery; Emily Banks; Karen Canfell; Dianne L O'Connell; David P Smith Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-03-09 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Frances J Drummond; Eamonn O'Leary; Anna Gavin; Heather Kinnear; Linda Sharp Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 3.359