Shellie D Ellis1, Soohyun Hwang2, Emily Morrow3, Kim S Kimminau4, Kelly Goonan5, Laurie Petty3, Edward Ellerbeck1, J Brantley Thrasher6. 1. Department of Population Health, School of Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA. 2. Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Drive, 1101 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7411, USA. soohwang@live.unc.edu. 3. Department of Sociology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA. 4. Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA. 5. Independent Researcher/Consultant/Scientific Writer, Greensboro, NC, USA. 6. American Board of Urology, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend active surveillance as the preferred treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer, but only a minority of eligible men receive active surveillance, and practice variation is substantial. The aim of this study is to describe barriers to urologists' recommendation of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer and explore variation of barriers by setting. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews among 22 practicing urologists, evenly distributed between academic and community practice. We coded barriers to active surveillance according to a conceptual model of determinants of treatment quality to identify potential opportunities for intervention. RESULTS: Community and academic urologists were generally in agreement on factors influencing active surveillance. Urologists perceived patient-level factors to have the greatest influence on recommendations, particularly tumor pathology, patient age, and judgements about the patient's ability to adhere to follow-up protocols. They also noted cross-cutting clinical barriers, including concerns about the adequacy of biopsy samples, inconsistent protocols to guide active surveillance, and side effects of biopsy procedures. Urologists had differing opinions on the impact of environmental factors, such as financial disincentives and fear of litigation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite national and international recommendations, both academic and community urologists note a variety of barriers to implementing active surveillance in low risk prostate cancer. These barriers will need to be specifically addressed in efforts to help urologists offer active surveillance more consistently.
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend active surveillance as the preferred treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer, but only a minority of eligible men receive active surveillance, and practice variation is substantial. The aim of this study is to describe barriers to urologists' recommendation of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer and explore variation of barriers by setting. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews among 22 practicing urologists, evenly distributed between academic and community practice. We coded barriers to active surveillance according to a conceptual model of determinants of treatment quality to identify potential opportunities for intervention. RESULTS: Community and academic urologists were generally in agreement on factors influencing active surveillance. Urologists perceived patient-level factors to have the greatest influence on recommendations, particularly tumor pathology, patientage, and judgements about the patient's ability to adhere to follow-up protocols. They also noted cross-cutting clinical barriers, including concerns about the adequacy of biopsy samples, inconsistent protocols to guide active surveillance, and side effects of biopsy procedures. Urologists had differing opinions on the impact of environmental factors, such as financial disincentives and fear of litigation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite national and international recommendations, both academic and community urologists note a variety of barriers to implementing active surveillance in low risk prostate cancer. These barriers will need to be specifically addressed in efforts to help urologists offer active surveillance more consistently.
Entities:
Keywords:
Active surveillance; Adoption; Barriers; Low-risk disease; Prostate cancer
Authors: Paul R Womble; James E Montie; Zaojun Ye; Susan M Linsell; Brian R Lane; David C Miller Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-08-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Jeffrey S Montgomery; David R Rovner; Laura D Scherer; Jesse Whitfield; Valerie C Kahn; Edgar C Merkle; Peter A Ubel; Angela Fagerlin Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2015-08-24 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Patricia A Ganz; John M Barry; Wylie Burke; Nananda F Col; Phaedra S Corso; Everett Dodson; M Elizabeth Hammond; Barry A Kogan; Charles F Lynch; Lee Newcomer; Eric J Seifter; Janet A Tooze; Kasisomayajula Vish Viswanath; Hunter Wessells Journal: NIH Consens State Sci Statements Date: 2011 Dec 5-7