Literature DB >> 26498649

Do Men Receive Information Required for Shared Decision Making About PSA Testing? Results from a National Survey.

Bryan Leyva1, Alexander Persoskie2, Allison Ottenbacher3, Jada G Hamilton4, Jennifer D Allen5, Sarah C Kobrin6, Stephen H Taplin6.   

Abstract

Most professional organizations, including the American College of Physicians and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, emphasize that screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test should only occur after a detailed discussion between the health-care provider and patient about the known risks and potential benefits of the test. In fact, guidelines strongly advise health-care providers to involve patients, particularly those at elevated risk of prostate cancer, in a "shared decision making" (SDM) process about PSA testing. We analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey 2011-2012-a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey-to examine the extent to which health professionals provided men with information critical to SDM prior to PSA testing, including (1) that patients had a choice about whether or not to undergo PSA testing, (2) that not all doctors recommend PSA testing, and (3) that no one is sure if PSA testing saves lives. Over half (55 %) of men between the ages of 50 and 74 reported ever having had a PSA test. However, only 10 % of men, regardless of screening status, reported receiving all three pieces of information: 55 % reported being informed that they could choose whether or not to undergo testing, 22 % reported being informed that some doctors recommend PSA testing and others do not, and 14 % reported being informed that no one is sure if PSA testing actually saves lives. Black men and men with lower levels of education were less likely to be provided this information. There is a need to improve patient-provider communication about the uncertainties associated with the PSA test. Interventions directed at patients, providers, and practice settings should be considered.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PSA testing; Patient-provider communication; Prostate cancer screening; Shared decision making; Uncertainty

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26498649      PMCID: PMC5515087          DOI: 10.1007/s13187-015-0870-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Educ        ISSN: 0885-8195            Impact factor:   2.037


  57 in total

1.  A piece of my mind. Winners and losers.

Authors:  Daniel Merenstein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-07       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  A conceptual framework for interprofessional shared decision making in home care: protocol for a feasibility study.

Authors:  France Légaré; Dawn Stacey; Nathalie Brière; Sophie Desroches; Serge Dumont; Kimberley Fraser; Mary-Anne Murray; Anne Sales; Denise Aubé
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 2.655

3.  Decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening National Health Interview Survey, 2000.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Ralph J Coates; Robert J Uhler; Nancy Breen
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2006-03-23       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Primary care physicians' use of an informed decision-making process for prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Robert J Volk; Suzanne K Linder; Michael A Kallen; James M Galliher; Mindy S Spano; Patricia Dolan Mullen; Stephen J Spann
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

Review 6.  Localised prostatic cancer: management and detection issues.

Authors:  W F Whitmore
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1994-05-21       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 7.  Prostate-specific antigen: a review of the validation of the most commonly used cancer biomarker.

Authors:  Javier Hernández; Ian M Thompson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Walking in the shoes of patients, not just in their genes: a patient-centered approach to genomic medicine.

Authors:  Neeraj K Arora; Bradford W Hesse; Steven B Clauser
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  Are physicians discussing prostate cancer screening with their patients and why or why not? A pilot study.

Authors:  Carmen E Guerra; Samantha E Jacobs; John H Holmes; Judy A Shea
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.

Authors:  Karine Gravel; France Légaré; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  21 in total

1.  The Effects of Race and Racial Concordance on Patient-Physician Communication: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Megan Johnson Shen; Emily B Peterson; Rosario Costas-Muñiz; Migda Hunter Hernandez; Sarah T Jewell; Konstantina Matsoukas; Carma L Bylund
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2017-03-08

2.  Leveraging the Family Influence of Women in Prostate Cancer Efforts Targeting African American Men.

Authors:  O N Okoro; C A Rutherford; S F Witherspoon
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2017-08-25

3.  Talking About Your Prostate: Perspectives from Providers and Community Members.

Authors:  Seul Ki Choi; Jessica S Seel; Susan E Steck; Johnny Payne; Douglas McCormick; Courtney S Schrock; Daniela B Friedman
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Bernt-Peter Robra
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

5.  Recent Patterns in Shared Decision Making for Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing in the United States.

Authors:  Stacey A Fedewa; Ted Gansler; Robert Smith; Ann Goding Sauer; Richard Wender; Otis W Brawley; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 5.166

6.  Engaging African American Men as Citizen Scientists to Validate a Prostate Cancer Biomarker: Work-in-Progress.

Authors:  Karriem S Watson; Vida Henderson; Marcus Murray; Adam B Murphy; Josef Ben Levi; Tiffany McDowell; Alfreda Holloway-Beth; Pooja Gogana; Michael A Dixon; LeAndre Moore; Ivanhoe Hall; Alexander Kimbrough; Yamilé Molina; Robert A Winn
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2019

7.  What is a good medical decision? A research agenda guided by perspectives from multiple stakeholders.

Authors:  Jada G Hamilton; Sarah E Lillie; Dana L Alden; Laura Scherer; Megan Oser; Christine Rini; Miho Tanaka; John Baleix; Mikki Brewster; Simon Craddock Lee; Mary K Goldstein; Robert M Jacobson; Ronald E Myers; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Erika A Waters
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2016-08-26

8.  Pre-implementation Evaluation of PARTNER-MH: A Mental Healthcare Disparity Intervention for Minority Veterans in the VHA.

Authors:  Johanne Eliacin; Marianne S Matthias; Diana J Burgess; Scott Patterson; Teresa Damush; Mandi Pratt-Chapman; Mark McGovern; Matthew Chinman; Tasneem Talib; Caitlin O'Connor; Angela Rollins
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2021-01

9.  Health Literacy and Health-Care Engagement as Predictors of Shared Decision-Making Among Adult Information Seekers in the USA: a Secondary Data Analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey.

Authors:  Lisa T Wigfall; Andrea H Tanner
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.037

10.  Effect of a Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid for African-American Men in Primary Care Settings.

Authors:  Jennifer D Allen; Christopher P Filson; Donna L Berry
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-08-27       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.