Literature DB >> 29359883

A clinician-centred programme for behaviour change in the optimal use of staging investigations for newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Alison B Rutledge1,2, Nicholas McLeod1,2, Nicholas Mehan1, Timothy W Regan3, Paul Ainsworth1, Peter Chong1, Terrence Doyle1,2, Martin White1, Rob W Sanson-Fisher2, Jarad M Martin2,4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To improve imaging utilisation and reduce the widespread overuse of staging investigations, in the form of computed tomography (CT) and whole-body bone scans for men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in the Hunter region of NSW, Australia, by implementation of a multifaceted clinician-centred behaviour change programme. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records of all patients with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer were reviewed prior to the intervention (July 2014 to July 2015), and the results of this audit were presented to participating urologists by a clinical champion. Urologists then underwent focused education based on current guidelines. Patterns of imaging use for staging were then re-evaluated (November 2015 to July 2016). Patients were stratified into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups as described by the D'Amico classification system.
RESULTS: A total of 144 patients were retrospectively enrolled into the study cohort. The use of diagnostic imaging for staging purposes significantly decreased in men with low- and intermediate-risk disease post intervention. In low-risk patients, the use of CT decreased from 43% to 0% (P = 0.01). A total of 21% of patients underwent bone scans in the pre-intervention group compared with18% in the post-intervention group (P = 0.84). In intermediate-risk patients, the use of CT decreased from 89% to 34% (P < 0.001), whilst the use of bone scan decreased from 63% to 37% (P = 0.02). In high-risk patients, the appropriate use of imaging was maintained, with CT performed in 87% compared with 85% and bone scan in 87% compared with 65% (P = 0.07).
CONCLUSION: Our results show that a focused, clinician-centred education programme can lead to improved guideline adherence at a regional level. The assessment of trends and application of such a programme at a state-based or national level could be further assessed in the future with the help of registry data. This will be particularly important in future with the advent of advanced imaging, such as prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography.
© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; diagnostic imaging; neoplasm metastasis; patient safety; prostatic neoplasms; quality improvement

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29359883     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14144

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  3 in total

1.  Comparison of orthogonal NLP methods for clinical phenotyping and assessment of bone scan utilization among prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Jean Coquet; Selen Bozkurt; Kathleen M Kan; Michelle K Ferrari; Douglas W Blayney; James D Brooks; Tina Hernandez-Boussard
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2019-04-20       Impact factor: 6.317

Review 2.  Systematic review of interventions that improve provider compliance to imaging guidelines for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Samuel M Pettit; David Mikhail; Michael Feuerstein
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 2.052

Review 3.  Management of advanced prostate cancer in a middle-income country: real-world consideration of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2017.

Authors:  Marniza Saad; Adlinda Alip; Jasmine Lim; Matin Mellor Abdullah; Flora Li Tze Chong; Chong Beng Chua; Fuad Ismail; Rachael Kit-Tsan Khong; Chun Sen Lim; Chit Sin Loh; Rohan Malek; Khairul Asri Mohd Ghani; Ibtisam Md Noor; Noor Ashani Md Yusoff; Noor Azam Nasuha; Azad Razack; Hwoei Fen Soo Hoo; Murali Sundram; Hui Meng Tan; Muthukkumaran Thiagarajan; Guan Chou Teh; Pei Jye Voon; Teng Aik Ong
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 5.588

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.