Literature DB >> 34208627

Do the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Tests That Are Ordered in Clinical Practice Adhere to the Pertinent Guidelines?

Mari Carmen Bernal-Soriano1,2, Lucy Anne Parker1,2, Maite López-Garrigós2,3, Ildefonso Hernández-Aguado1,2, Luis Gómez-Pérez4,5, Juan-Pablo Caballero-Romeu6,7, María Pastor-Valero1,2, Nuria García6, Rocío Alfayate-Guerra8, Blanca Lumbreras1,2.   

Abstract

Scientific societies have provided guidelines to reduce PSA-specific harms. We studied the potential non-compliance of PSA testing with current guidelines in general practice. A cross-sectional study of a random sample of 1291 patients with a PSA test was performed between January and April 2018 in primary health care. Patients with a previous prostate cancer diagnosis or those who were being followed-up for previous high PSA values were excluded. Two independent researchers classified whether each test was potentially non-compliant with recommendations. We estimated frequencies of potentially non-compliant PSA determinations and calculated prevalence ratios (PR) to assess their relationship with possible explanatory variables. A total of 66% (95% CI: 62-69%) of PSA requests in asymptomatic patients were potentially non-compliant with the current guideline. This was associated with having a previous diagnosis of neoplasm (PR adjusted by age and life expectancy: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.02-1.37) as well as being a current consumer of tobacco, alcohol, or other drugs (PR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.67-0.97). Real world data shows that patients are still frequently exposed to overdiagnosis risk with a PSA potentially non-compliant with recommendations. Patients diagnosed with another neoplasm or non-consumers of toxic substances were more exposed, probably due to increased contact with doctors or health-seeking behaviour.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical practice guidelines; prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen; screening

Year:  2021        PMID: 34208627     DOI: 10.3390/jcm10122650

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Med        ISSN: 2077-0383            Impact factor:   4.241


  1 in total

1.  PROSHADE Protocol: Designing and Evaluating a Decision Aid for Promoting Shared Decision Making in Opportunistic Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Mix-Method Study.

Authors:  Blanca Lumbreras; Lucy Anne Parker; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Javier Mira-Bernabeu; Luis Gómez-Pérez; Juan Pablo Caballero-Romeu; Salvador Pertusa-Martínez; Ana Cebrián-Cuenca; Irene Moral-Peláez; Maite López-Garrigós; Carlos Canelo-Aybar; Elena Ronda; Mercedes Guilabert; Antonio Prieto-González; Ildefonso Hernández-Aguado
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 4.614

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.