A decision aid versus shared decision making for prostate cancer screening results of a randomized, controlled trial

被引:1
|
作者
Stamm, Andrew W. [1 ]
Banerji, John S. [1 ]
Wolff, Erika M. [1 ]
Slee, April [2 ]
Akapame, Sydney [2 ]
Dahl, Kathryn [1 ]
Massman, John D., III [1 ]
Soung, Michael C. [3 ]
Pittenger, Kim R. [3 ]
Corman, John M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Virginia Mason, Sect Urol & Renal Transplantat, Seattle, WA USA
[2] Axio Res, Seattle, WA USA
[3] Virginia Mason, Dept Primary Care, Seattle, WA USA
关键词
prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen based-screening; shared decision making; decision aid; primary care; HOSPITAL SURVEY DEVELOPMENT; TASK-FORCE RECOMMENDATION;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: Shared decision making (SDM) is widely encouraged by both the American Urological Association and Choosing Wisely for prostate cancer screening. Implementation of SDM is challenging secondary to time constraints and competing patient priorities. One strategy to mitigate the difficulties in implementing SDM is to utilize a decision aid (DA). Here we evaluate whether a DA improves a patient's prostate cancer knowledge and affects prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening rates. Materials and methods: Patients were randomized to usual care (UC), DA, or DA + SDM. Perception of quality of care was measured using the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey. Outcomes were stratified by long term provider relationship (LTPR, > 3 years) versus short term provider relationship (STPR, < 3 years). Knowledge of prostate cancer screening and the decision regarding screening were assessed. Groups were compared using ANOVA and logistic regression models. Results: A total of 329 patients were randomized. Patients in the DA + SDM arm were significantly more likely to report discussing the implication of screening (33% DA + SDM, 22% UC, 16% DA, p = 0.0292) and answered significantly more knowledge questions correctly compared to the UC arm (5.03 versus 4.46, p = 0.046). However, those in the DA arm were significantly less likely to report that they always felt encouraged to discuss all health concerns (72% DA, 78% DA + SDM, 87% UC, p = 0.0285). Interestingly, STPR patients in the DA arm were significantly more likely to undergo PSA-based prostate cancer screening (41%) than the UC arm (8%, p = 0.019). This effect was not observed in the LTPR group. Conclusions: Providing patients a DA without a personal interaction resulted in a greater chance of undergoing PSA-based screening without improving knowledge about screening or understanding of the consequences of this decision. This effect was exacerbated by a shorter term provider relationship. With complex issues such as the decision to pursue PSA-based prostate cancer screening, tools cannot substitute for direct interaction with a trusted provider.
引用
收藏
页码:8910 / 8917
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A randomized controlled trial of shared decision making for prostate cancer screening
    Volk, RJ
    Cass, AR
    Spann, SJ
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 1999, 8 (04) : 333 - 340
  • [2] A personalized decision aid for prostate cancer shared decision making
    Hilary P. Bagshaw
    Alejandro Martinez
    Nastaran Heidari
    David Scheinker
    Alan Pollack
    Radka Stoyanova
    Eric Horwitz
    Gerard Morton
    Amar U. Kishan
    Mark K. Buyyounouski
    [J]. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 21
  • [3] A personalized decision aid for prostate cancer shared decision making
    Bagshaw, Hilary P.
    Martinez, Alejandro
    Heidari, Nastaran
    Scheinker, David
    Pollack, Alan
    Stoyanova, Radka
    Horwitz, Eric
    Morton, Gerard
    Kishan, Amar U.
    Buyyounouski, Mark K.
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING, 2021, 21 (01)
  • [4] Risk Stratification and Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Schroy, Paul C., III
    Duhovic, Emir
    Chen, Clara A.
    Heeren, Timothy C.
    Lopez, William
    Apodaca, Danielle L.
    Wong, John B.
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2016, 36 (04) : 526 - 535
  • [5] Aid-Assisted Decision Making and Colorectal Cancer Screening A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Schroy, Paul C., III
    Emmons, Karen M.
    Peters, Ellen
    Glick, Julie T.
    Robinson, Patricia A.
    Lydotes, Maria A.
    Mylvaganam, Shamini R.
    Coe, Alison M.
    Chen, Clara A.
    Chaisson, Christine E.
    Pignone, Michael P.
    Prout, Marianne N.
    Davidson, Peter K.
    Heeren, Timothy C.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2012, 43 (06) : 573 - 583
  • [6] The Impact of a Novel Computer-Based Decision Aid on Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Trial
    Schroy, Paul C., III
    Emmons, Karen
    Peters, Ellen
    Glick, Julie T.
    Robinson, Patricia A.
    Lydotes, Maria A.
    Mylvanaman, Shamini
    Evans, Stephen
    Chaisson, Christine
    Pignone, Michael
    Prout, Marianne
    Davidson, Peter
    Heeren, Timothy C.
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2011, 31 (01) : 93 - 107
  • [7] The Role of Personalised Choice in Decision Support: A Randomized Controlled Trial of an Online Decision Aid for Prostate Cancer Screening
    Salkeld, Glenn
    Cunich, Michelle
    Dowie, Jack
    Howard, Kirsten
    Patel, Manish I.
    Mann, Graham
    Lipworth, Wendy
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (04):
  • [8] Validation of a prostate cancer decision aid tool for shared decision making
    Bloemen-van Gurp, E. J.
    Vanneste, B. G. L.
    Berlanga, A. J.
    Rijnkels, D.
    Van de Beek, K.
    Van Roermund, J.
    Lambin, P.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2016, 119 : S240 - S241
  • [9] Decision Aid to Technologically Enhance Shared decision making (DATES): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Masahito Jimbo
    Karen Kelly-Blake
    Ananda Sen
    Sarah T Hawley
    Mack T Ruffin
    [J]. Trials, 14
  • [10] Decision Aid to Technologically Enhance Shared decision making (DATES): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Jimbo, Masahito
    Kelly-Blake, Karen
    Sen, Ananda
    Hawley, Sarah T.
    Ruffin, Mack T.
    [J]. TRIALS, 2013, 14