Treatment decision making remains a complex task for localized prostate cancer. Decision aids for patients can support the medical consultation. However, it is not known if German urologists accept decision aids for patients.
Although prediction tools for prostate cancer (PCa) are essential for high-quality treatment decision-making, little is known about the degree of confidence in existing tools and whether they are used in clinical practice from radiation oncologists (RO) and urologists (URO).
Over the past decade, despite the controversies surrounding prostate cancer screening, significant refinements have improved its application. PSA screening, although it has been questioned, appears to confer a mortality benefit and remains the most effective way to identify the possible presence of prostate cancer.
Adoption of active surveillance (AS) is widely variable across urological communities. This suggests a need for more consistency in the counseling of patients. To address this need, we used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop appropriateness criteria and counseling statements for AS.
The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) is a web-based decision support system for men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer that has demonstrated efficacy in reducing decisional conflict.
Cancer screening is an important tool for reducing morbidity and mortality in the elderly. In this article, performance characteristics of commonly used screening tests for colorectal, lung, prostate, breast, and cervical cancers are discussed.
In 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men of all ages. Following this change, screening declined yet the complete impact on clinical presentation is not well defined in the screen-eligible population.
This study aimed to explore the effects of a decision support intervention (DSI) and shared decision making (SDM) on knowledge, perceptions about treatment, and treatment choice among men diagnosed with localized low-risk prostate cancer (PCa).
Patient decision aids (PDAs) can support the treatment decision making process and empower patients to take a proactive role in their treatment pathway while using a shared decision-making (SDM) approach making participatory medicine possible.
Most professional organizations, including the American College of Physicians and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, emphasize that screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test should only occur after a detailed discussion between the health-care provider and patient about the known risks and potential benefits of the test.
To evaluate the effectiveness of a web-based decision aid (DA) with values clarification exercises (VCEs) compared with usual care for men with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH).
To evaluate barriers to implementation of patient decision aids (PDAs) issued in an electronic medical record (EMR). We undertook an implementation outcomes analysis focused on what proportion of men eligible for the PDA received it (penetration), and of the men who received it, how many used it as intended (fidelity).
Active surveillance is a good management option for some men with non-metastatic prostate cancer. In this review, we examine the evidence for several topics related to active surveillance. We examine: (1) which patients should be eligible for active surveillance, (2) what follow-up (monitoring) protocols should be used for men on surveillance, (3) what is the role of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for men on surveillance, and (4) what is the prognosis for men who choose surveillance compared to radical treatment.
To describe the development and implementation of a prostate cancer screening intervention and risk assessment decision tool.
Community health promotion with pre- and post-education knowledge questionnaires.
This article provides the patient perspective on cancer clinical trials.
Urologic oncology. 2018 Feb 07 [Epub ahead of print]
Rick Bangs, Tony Crispino
SWOG Patient Advocate Committee and SWOG Bladder Cancer Patient Advocate.
The initial treatment decision for newly diagnosed non-metastatic prostate cancer is complex. Multiple valid approaches exist, without a clear and absolute consensus for every clinical scenario, and therefore specialist opinions may vary.
Little is known about how physicians present diagnosis and treatment planning in routine practice in preference-sensitive treatment decisions. We evaluated completeness and quality of informed decision making in localized prostate cancer post biopsy encounters.
Medical decisions concerning active surveillance are complex, especially when evidence on superiority of one of the treatments is lacking. Decision aids have been developed to facilitate shared decision-making on whether to pursue an active surveillance strategy.
Canada's approach to shared decision making (SDM) remains as disparate as its healthcare system; a conglomerate of 14 public plans - ten provincial, three territorial and one federal. The healthcare research funding environment has been largely positive for SDM because there was funding for knowledge translation research which also encompassed SDM.
Widespread adoption and use of the practice of shared decision-making among health-care providers, especially urologists, has been limited. This study explores urologists' perceptions about their conversational practices leading to decision-making by newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients facing treatment.
To develop a model and methodology for predicting the risk of Gleason upgrading in prostate cancer active surveillance (AS) patients, and using the predicted risks to create risk-based personalized biopsy schedules as an alternative to one-size-fits-all schedules (e.
To assess the influence of patient preferences and urologist recommendations in treatment decisions for clinically localized prostate cancer.
We enrolled 257 men with clinically localized prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen <20; Gleason score 6 or 7) seen by urologists (primarily residents and fellows) in 4 Veterans Affairs medical centers.
More than any other cancer, prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests increases the risk a man will have to face a diagnosis of prostate cancer. The best evidence from screening trials suggests a small but finite benefit from prostate cancer screening in terms of prostate cancer-specific mortality, about 1 fewer prostate cancer death per 1000 men screened over 10 years.
Prostate cancer (PCa) is a common medical condition in the United States, with an estimated 16% of men receiving a diagnosis during their lifetime. Although it is the second leading cause of cancer-specific deaths among men, PCa will not be the cause of death for most men who are diagnosed with it.
To evaluate factors associated with use of patient navigation in a prostate cancer population and identify whether navigation is associated with prolonged time to care. Cancer patient navigation has been shown to improve access to cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment, but little is known about patient navigation in prostate cancer care.
Some deaf men who use American Sign Language (ASL) experience barriers in patient-physician communication which may leave them at disparity for shared decision making compared to hearing men. Transparent communication accessibility is needed between deaf male ASL users and their physicians to maximize the benefit to risk ratio of using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening tool for early detection.
Rates and choice of treatment for localized prostate cancer vary according to race/ethnicity in American men. We hypothesized that there were group differences in influential values and preferences related to treatment decisions.
Switzerland with its decentralized, liberal health system and its tradition of direct democracy may be an ideal place for shared decision making (SDM) to take root organically, rather than using top-down regulations seen in other countries.
BACKGROUND - Despite established evidence for using patient decision aids, their use with newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients remains limited, partly due to variability in the characteristics of decision aids. The objective of this study was to systematically review decision aids for their content, development process, effectiveness and potential for implementation in routine urologic practice for newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients.
As prostate cancer (PCa) screening decisions often occur in outpatient primary care, a brief tool to help the PCa screening conversation in busy clinic settings is needed.
A previously created 9-item tool to aid PCa screening discussions was tested in five diverse primary care clinics.
Health literacy is increasingly being recognized as a widespread public health challenge in Europe. This commentary explores the importance of health literacy amongst cancer patients (ie, cancer literacy) and examines how cancer literacy can be improved through the practical application of health literacy principles within the context of providing timely, patient-centered, value-based care in Europe.
Treatments for localized prostate cancer present challenging tradeoffs in the face of uncertain treatment benefits. These options are best weighed in a process of shared decision-making with the patient's healthcare team.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE - While decision support tools such as decision aids can contribute to shared decision making, implementing these tools in daily practice is challenging. To identify and address issues around the use of decision support tools in routine care, this study explores the views of men and general practitioners on using a DA for early detection of prostate cancer.
To evaluate treatment preferences of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) before and after using a web-based decision aid (DA).
Between July 2016 and January 2017 patients were invited to use a web-based LUTS/BPH DA.
The availability of several treatment options for prostate cancer creates a situation where patients may need to come to a shared decision with their health-care team regarding their care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is the concept of a patient and a health-care professional collaborating to make decisions about the patient's treatment course.
Information about prostate cancer patients' experiences with their treatment is crucial to optimize shared decision-making. This study examined unmet expectations in prostate cancer patients and their association with decision regret.
There is controversy regarding performing concomitant anti-incontinence procedures at the time of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair. Data supports improvement in stress urinary incontinence (SUI) with concomitant sling, but increased adverse events.
Login to update email address, newsletter preferences and use bookmarks.