Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Provider Perceptions of an Electronic Health Record Prostate Cancer Screening Tool.
Carlsson, Sigrid V; Preston, Mark; Vickers, Andrew; Malhotra, Deepak; Ehdaie, Behfar; Healey, Michael; Kibel, Adam S.
Afiliação
  • Carlsson SV; Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States.
  • Preston M; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States.
  • Vickers A; Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  • Malhotra D; Division of Urological Cancers, Department of Translational Medicine, Medical Faculty, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
  • Ehdaie B; Division of Urological Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
  • Healey M; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States.
  • Kibel AS; Organizations, and Markets Unit, Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Appl Clin Inform ; 15(2): 282-294, 2024 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38599619
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

We conducted a focus group to assess the attitudes of primary care physicians (PCPs) toward prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-screening algorithms, perceptions of using decision support tools, and features that would make such tools feasible to implement.

METHODS:

A multidisciplinary team (primary care, urology, behavioral sciences, bioinformatics) developed the decision support tool that was presented to a focus group of 10 PCPs who also filled out a survey. Notes and audio-recorded transcripts were analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis.

RESULTS:

The survey showed that PCPs followed different guidelines. In total, 7/10 PCPs agreed that engaging in shared decision-making about PSA screening was burdensome. The majority (9/10) had never used a decision aid for PSA screening. Although 70% of PCPs felt confident about their ability to discuss PSA screening, 90% still felt a need for a provider-facing platform to assist in these discussions. Three major themes emerged (1) confirmatory reactions regarding the importance, innovation, and unmet need for a decision support tool embedded in the electronic health record; (2) issues around implementation and application of the tool in clinic workflow and PCPs' own clinical bias; and (3) attitudes/reflections regarding discrepant recommendations from various guideline groups that cause confusion.

CONCLUSION:

There was overwhelmingly positive support for the need for a provider-facing decision support tool to assist with PSA-screening decisions in the primary care setting. PCPs appreciated that the tool would allow flexibility for clinical judgment and documentation of shared decision-making. Incorporation of suggestions from this focus group into a second version of the tool will be used in subsequent pilot testing.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Médicos de Atenção Primária Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Appl Clin Inform Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Médicos de Atenção Primária Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Appl Clin Inform Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos