Brandon J Otto1, E Charles Osterberg1, Sanjay Salgado1, Douglas S Scherr1, Shahrokh F Shariat2. 1. Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 2. Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York; Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: sfshariat@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Prostate cancer risk estimation tools have been developed to help guide patients and physicians with clinical decision making across all disease states. We assessed use patterns of these tools using an online survey sent to AUA (American Urological Association) members. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We distributed a 21-question online survey to 5,674 AUA members to query prostate cancer risk estimation tool use. The survey was divided into 4 categories, including 1) demographics, 2) prebiopsy risk assessment, 3) pretreatment risk assessment and 4) risk estimation tool use. RESULTS: A total of 565 members (10%) responded to the online survey, of whom 31% reported using a risk estimation tool in the prebiopsy decision setting. Providers who spent more than 20 minutes counseling patients were more likely to use a risk estimation tool (OR 2.2, p <0.01). After the prostate cancer diagnosis 70% of providers used a risk estimation tools to guide treatment recommendations. The total time spent counseling a patient (greater than 30 minutes) and the number of years in practice (fewer than 10) predicted prostate cancer risk tool use (OR 2.4, p <0.01 and 3.4, p <0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AUA respondents use risk estimation tools more frequently in the pretreatment setting than in the prebiopsy setting. The time spent counseling patients and the time since graduation from residency predicted the likelihood of using risk estimation tools.
PURPOSE:Prostate cancer risk estimation tools have been developed to help guide patients and physicians with clinical decision making across all disease states. We assessed use patterns of these tools using an online survey sent to AUA (American Urological Association) members. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We distributed a 21-question online survey to 5,674 AUA members to query prostate cancer risk estimation tool use. The survey was divided into 4 categories, including 1) demographics, 2) prebiopsy risk assessment, 3) pretreatment risk assessment and 4) risk estimation tool use. RESULTS: A total of 565 members (10%) responded to the online survey, of whom 31% reported using a risk estimation tool in the prebiopsy decision setting. Providers who spent more than 20 minutes counseling patients were more likely to use a risk estimation tool (OR 2.2, p <0.01). After the prostate cancer diagnosis 70% of providers used a risk estimation tools to guide treatment recommendations. The total time spent counseling a patient (greater than 30 minutes) and the number of years in practice (fewer than 10) predicted prostate cancer risk tool use (OR 2.4, p <0.01 and 3.4, p <0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AUA respondents use risk estimation tools more frequently in the pretreatment setting than in the prebiopsy setting. The time spent counseling patients and the time since graduation from residency predicted the likelihood of using risk estimation tools.
Authors: Boris Gershman; Paul Maroni; Jon C Tilburt; Robert J Volk; Badrinath Konety; Charles L Bennett; Alexander Kutikov; Marc C Smaldone; Victor Chen; Simon P Kim Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 4.226