Brindha Pillay1,2,3, Daniel Moon4,5,6, Denny Meyer7, Helen Crowe8,9,10, Sarah Mann5, Nicholas Howard8,9, Addie Wootten8,10, Mark Frydenberg5,11,12,13. 1. Epworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. bpillay37@gmail.com. 2. Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. bpillay37@gmail.com. 3. Psychosocial Oncology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, Australia. bpillay37@gmail.com. 4. Epworth Centre for Robotic Surgery, Epsworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 5. Australian Urology Associates, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 6. University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 7. School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 8. Epworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 9. Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 10. Australian Prostate Centre, North Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 11. Urology, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 12. Clinical Institute of Specialty Surgery, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 13. Department of Surgery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is little research assessing the impact of providing men with information about prostate cancer (PCa) treatment options at the time of referral for a prostate biopsy. Study objectives were to determine whether receiving an information booklet about PCa treatment options prior to receiving biopsy results was acceptable to patients, and if receiving this information influenced levels of anxiety, depression, distress, and treatment decisional conflict. METHODS:Between June 2016 and September 2017, a randomised block design was used to allocate patients from an Australian urology practice into the intervention or control group. Patients in the intervention group were provided with written information about treatment options for localised PCa prior to their biopsy. Outcome measures including the Distress Thermometer, Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Decisional Conflict Scale were completed pre-biopsy and 2-3 weeks post-biopsy. Ninety-eight patients referred for an initial prostate biopsy for an elevated PSA test or suspicious digital rectal exam participated in the study (response rate = 78%). RESULTS: Multimodal repeated-measures analyses showed no significant differences between control and intervention groups in changes in distress, anxiety, or depression from pre- to post-biopsy, and in decisional conflict post-diagnosis (all p > .05). Thirty-five (87%) patients believed that the resource made it easier to understand subsequent explanation of treatment options, and 51 patients (98%) who received the intervention preferred to be given information at that time. CONCLUSIONS: Providing patients with information about treatment options prior to biopsy did not impact on changes in psychological distress and decisional conflict post-biopsy. However, the majority of patients preferred to be given such information at this time point.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: There is little research assessing the impact of providing men with information about prostate cancer (PCa) treatment options at the time of referral for a prostate biopsy. Study objectives were to determine whether receiving an information booklet about PCa treatment options prior to receiving biopsy results was acceptable to patients, and if receiving this information influenced levels of anxiety, depression, distress, and treatment decisional conflict. METHODS: Between June 2016 and September 2017, a randomised block design was used to allocate patients from an Australian urology practice into the intervention or control group. Patients in the intervention group were provided with written information about treatment options for localised PCa prior to their biopsy. Outcome measures including the Distress Thermometer, Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Decisional Conflict Scale were completed pre-biopsy and 2-3 weeks post-biopsy. Ninety-eight patients referred for an initial prostate biopsy for an elevated PSA test or suspicious digital rectal exam participated in the study (response rate = 78%). RESULTS: Multimodal repeated-measures analyses showed no significant differences between control and intervention groups in changes in distress, anxiety, or depression from pre- to post-biopsy, and in decisional conflict post-diagnosis (all p > .05). Thirty-five (87%) patients believed that the resource made it easier to understand subsequent explanation of treatment options, and 51 patients (98%) who received the intervention preferred to be given information at that time. CONCLUSIONS: Providing patients with information about treatment options prior to biopsy did not impact on changes in psychological distress and decisional conflict post-biopsy. However, the majority of patients preferred to be given such information at this time point.
Authors: Sanoj Punnen; Janet E Cowan; Laura B Dunn; Dianne M Shumay; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Charlotte J Hagerman; Paula G Bellini; Kim M Davis; Richard M Hoffman; David S Aaronson; Daniel Y Leigh; Riley E Zinar; David Penson; Stephen Van Den Eeden; Kathryn L Taylor Journal: Health Educ Res Date: 2017-04-01
Authors: Philippe D Violette; Thomas Agoritsas; Paul Alexander; Jarno Riikonen; Henrikki Santti; Arnav Agarwal; Neera Bhatnagar; Philipp Dahm; Victor Montori; Gordon H Guyatt; Kari A O Tikkinen Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Brindha Pillay; Daniel Moon; Christopher Love; Denny Meyer; Emma Ferguson; Helen Crowe; Nicholas Howard; Sarah Mann; Addie Wootten Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2017-10-27 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Carolina Chabrera; Adelaida Zabalegui; Marta Bonet; Mónica Caro; Joan Areal; Juan R González; Albert Font Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2015 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Steven B Zeliadt; Peggy A Hannon; Ranak B Trivedi; Laura M Bonner; Thuy T Vu; Carol Simons; Crystal A Kimmie; Elaine Y Hu; Chris Zipperer; Daniel W Lin Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 2.796