Considerations from employed African-American and white prostate cancer survivors on prostate cancer treatment and survivorship: a qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To solicit information/suggestions from prostate cancer survivors to improve survivorship experiences specific to work/workability. DESIGN: The study employed a qualitative/phenomenological approach. Black/African-American and white prostate cancer survivors who: (1) had prostatectomy or radiation therapy 6-36 months prior, (2) were working for pay within 30 days before having treatment, and (3) expected to be working for pay 6 months later (n = 45) were eligible for this study. Survivors were engaged in 60-to-90-minute structured interviews. Content analysis was used to ascertain prominent themes. RESULTS: Participants had the following recommendations for survivors: ask about research on treatment options and side effects; speak with other survivors about cancer diagnosis; and inform family/friends and employers about needed accommodations. Considerations for family/friends emphasized the significance of instrumental (e.g. help finding information) and emotional support (e.g. encouragement). Employer/co-worker considerations most often related to work-related accommodations/support and avoiding stigmatization of the survivor. Considerations for healthcare providers commonly included the provision of unbiased, plain-language communication about treatment options and side effects. No major differences existed by race. CONCLUSIONS: Needs of employed PrCA survivors, regardless of their race or treatment type, are commonly related to their desire for informational, instrumental, and/or emotional support from family/friends, employers/co-workers, and healthcare providers. The requested supports are most often related to the side effects of prostate cancer treatment.

The Future of Telehealth in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care: A Qualitative Study of Patient and Provider Perspectives in South Carolina.

To ensure care continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth has been widely implemented in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) care. However, participation in and benefits from telehealth were unequal. This study aims to assess the willingness of people living with HIV (PWH) and HIV care providers to use telehealth and perceptions of the future role of telehealth. In-depth interviews with 18 PWH and 10 HIV care providers from South Carolina assessed their willingness to use telehealth, their perspectives on the future of telehealth in HIV care, and recommendations to improve telehealth. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Most PWH were female (61%), Black/African American (67%), and non-Hispanic (78%). Most PWH (61%) and all providers had used telehealth for HIV care. Most PWH and all providers reported being willing to use or (re-)consider telehealth HIV care services in the future. Providers suggested that telehealth is most suitable for routine HIV care encounters and for established, clinically stable, generally healthy PWH. Attitudes toward telehealth were heterogeneous, with most interviewees valuing telehealth similarly or superior to in-person care, yet >20% perceiving it less valuable. Recommendations to improve telehealth included multilevel strategies to address challenges across four domains: technology, the virtual nature of telehealth, administrative processes, and the sociodemographic profile of PWH. Telehealth in HIV care is here to stay; however, it may not yet be suitable for all PWH and all care encounters. Decision processes related to telehealth versus in-person care need to involve providers and PWH. Existing telehealth options require multilevel adjustments addressing persistent challenges.

Efficacy of Alexa, Google Assistant, and Siri for Supporting Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions for African-American Men.

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent non-skin cancer among all men, but African-Americans have morbidity and mortality at significantly higher rates than White men. To reduce this burden, authorities such as the American Cancer Society recommend that men make informed/shared screening decisions with a healthcare provider. Informed/shared screening decisions require that men have adequate prostate cancer knowledge. Virtual assistants are interactive communication technologies that have become popular for seeking health information, though information quality has been mixed. No prior research has investigated the quality of prostate cancer information disseminated by virtual assistants. The purpose of this study was to determine the response rates, accuracy, breadth, and credibility of three popular virtual assistants (Alexa, Google Assistant, and Siri) for supporting informed/shared prostate cancer screening decisions for African-American men. Each virtual assistant was evaluated on a tablet, cell phone, and smart speaker using 12 frequently asked screening questions. Responses were rated dichotomously (i.e., yes/no), and analyses were conducted using SPSS. Alexa on a phone or tablet and Google Assistant on a smart speaker had the best overall performance based on a combination of response, accuracy, and credibility scores. All other assistants scored below 75% in one or more areas. Additionally, all virtual assistants lacked the breadth to support an informed/shared prostate cancer screening decision. African-American men may be especially disadvantaged by using virtual assistants for prostate cancer information because of the lack of emphasis on their greater disease risk, higher mortality rates, and appropriate ages at which they should begin screening conversations.

Using Virtual Home Assistants to Address Vulnerable Adults' Complex Care Needs: An Exploratory Feasibility Study.

Harnessing technology has been proposed as one strategy to meet the social and health needs of older adults who prefer to age in place, but solutions remain elusive. In the current study, we evaluated the feasibility of using voice-activated virtual home assistants (VHAs; i.e., Amazon Echo "Alexa" devices) with older adults participating in the Program for All-Inclusive Care of the Elderly (PACE) over 4 months. Study methods included process evaluations, tracking participants' VHA use, and qualitative feedback from PACE participants and staff. The most common VHA activities were voice-activated smart lighting and asking for information. Participants infrequently used VHA activities that could promote physical or cognitive function (e.g., chair yoga, word recall game). Participants enjoyed using the VHAs, and PACE staff were enthusiastic about the potential for VHAs to facilitate aging in place and provided recommendations to increase participants' use of functional health activities. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 49(6), 33-40.].

The COVID-19 pandemic impact on independent and provider-based rural health clinics' operations and cancer prevention and screening provision in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cancer care, but it is unknown how the pandemic has affected care in Medicare-certified rural health clinics (RHCs) where cancer prevention and screening services are critical for their communities. This study examined how the provision of these cancer services changed pre- and peri-pandemic overall and by RHC type (independent and provider-based). METHODS: We administered a cross-sectional survey to a stratified random sample of RHCs to assess clinic characteristics, pandemic stressors, and the provision of cancer prevention and control services among RHCs pre- and peri-pandemic. We used McNemar's test and Wilcoxon signed rank tests to assess differences in the provision of cancer prevention and screening services pre- and peri-pandemic by RHC type. RESULTS: Of the 153 responding RHCs (response rate of 8%), 93 (60.8%) were provider-based and 60 (39.2%) were independent. Both RHC types were similar in their experience of pandemic stressors, though a higher proportion of independent RHCs reported financial concerns and challenges obtaining personal protective equipment. Both types of RHCs provided fewer cancer prevention and screening services peri-pandemic-5.8 to 4.2 for provider-based and 5.3 to 3.5 for independent (P<.05 for both). Across lung, cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer-related services, the proportion of both RHC groups providing services dropped peri-pandemic. DISCUSSION: The pandemic's impact on independent and provider-based RHCs and their patients was considerable. Going forward, greater resources should be targeted to RHCs-particularly independent RHCs-to ensure their ability to initiate and sustain evidence-based prevention and screening services.

Development and testing of "Is Lung Cancer Screening for You?" A computer-based decision aid.

PURPOSE: To reduce lung cancer mortality, individuals at high-risk should receive a low-dose computed tomography screening annually. To increase the likelihood of screening, interventions that promote shared decision-making are needed. The goal of this study was to investigate the feasibility, acceptability, usability, and preliminary effectiveness of a computer-based decision aid. METHODS: Thirty-three participants were recruited through primary-care clinics in a small southeastern-US city. Participants used a computer-based decision aid ("Is Lung Cancer Screening for You?") during a clinic appointment. Paper surveys collected self-reported feasibility, acceptability, and usability data. A research coordinator was present to observe each patient's and health-care provider's interactions, and to assess the fidelity of shared decision-making. RESULTS: The decision aid was feasible, acceptable for use in a clinic setting, and easy for participants to use. Patients had low decisional conflict following use of the decision aid and had high screening intention and actual screening rates. Shared decision-making discussions using the decision aid were nearly 6 min on average. CONCLUSION: Computer-based decision aids are feasible for promoting shared lung cancer-screening decisions. A more robust study is warranted to measure the added value of a computer-based version of this aid versus a paper-based aid.

Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Survivors of Lung Cancer and Their Partners: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of lung cancer and their partners often have complex unresolved physical, psychosocial, and behavioral needs that can negatively affect the survivors' and partners' well-being. This systematic review aimed to (1) examine the content and delivery of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) and (2) summarize and synthesize the current evidence for effectiveness of MBIs targeting survivors of lung cancer and/or one selected partner (dyads). METHOD: Six databases were searched for interventional studies published in English between 1980 and June 2020 using three terms (lung neoplasms, mindfulness, caregivers). For outcome measures, the interventions focused on behavioral change (meditation, yoga, stretching, breathing), symptom management (dyspnea, fatigue, sleep disruption, anxiety, depression, stress reduction), and knowledge. Two reviewers independently assessed article eligibility. One reviewer performed and another independently verified data extraction. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was used to critically appraise RCTs. RESULTS: Searching yielded 307 records, of which 64 were assessed for eligibility. Six studies investigated the impact of an MBI on survivors and partners. Four studies were single-arm feasibility studies; two were RCTs. Two feasibility studies and one RCT recruited romantic couples whereas the others recruited asymmetrical dyads. The single-arm studies reported strong feasibility and acceptability. RCTs reported significant outcomes for reduced cancer-related distress and depression, and improved QOL, self-compassion, mindfulness skills, and rumination. CONCLUSION: Dyadic intervention research is a growing field. Few interventions target individuals with lung cancer and their partners. No interventions target partners alone. Future research should evaluate rigorous methodologies that enhance the understanding of independent and interdependent health-related effects within dyads and across relationships and settings.

'I'm not a chance taker': A mixed methods exploration of factors affecting prostate cancer treatment decision-making.

OBJECTIVES: African American prostate cancer survivors experience post-treatment decisional regret more often than European Americans, which can lead to negative long-term effects on quality of life. A prominent driver of health-related decision-making is emotion, yet little work has examined the impact emotions may have on decisional regret. The goal of this study was to explore experiences, perceptions, and emotions of prostate cancer survivors in relation to their diagnostic and treatment decision-making processes, prostate cancer treatment, and outcomes. Additionally, we sought to identify factors that might explain differences in prostate cancer outcomes between African and European Americans. DESIGN: This mixed-methods study utilized a convergent parallel design, in which quantitative and qualitative data were collected simultaneously and then integrated to more robustly explain relationships between variables. Survivors were eligible for the study if they had been previously diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and were no more than six months post-treatment. The study was guided by the Risk as Feelings Model, which predicts the relationship between emotion and cognition in high-risk decision-making. RESULTS: No men experienced decisional regret following treatment, even if they experienced side effects. While all men reported being surprised about their prostate cancer diagnosis, strong negative emotions were more common among men under 65. Family support and spirituality appeared to mitigate negative emotions. Perceived authenticity of provider communication was the most influential mediator in men's decision-making and positive perceptions of their outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: To mitigate the impact emotional responses have on decision-making and post-treatment regret, providers should explore alternate therapies (e.g. counseling for men diagnosed with prostate cancer at a young age) and include family members in prostate cancer treatment discussions. Most importantly, providers should be aware of the importance of quality communication on men's cognitive and emotional processes and their perceptions of treatment outcomes.

Development of the Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework: A Context-Specific Expansion of the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 2 decades, numerous decision-making interventions have been developed to guide the prostate cancer (PrCA) treatment choices of patients and families. These interventions are often supported by economic decision frameworks, which do not account for the role of emotions in treatment decisions. In some instances, emotion-driven decisions can override an individual's cognitive evaluation of a decision, leading to unfavorable outcomes such as decision regret. OBJECTIVES: To produce a Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework based on the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis. METHODS: The authors reviewed seminal research in emotion and decision-making in an effort to create a context-specific decision framework. RESULTS: Five variables, not germane to the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis, play prominent roles in PrCA decision-making including age, spirituality, family support, healthcare provider communication, and perception of treatment outcomes. While family support only affects decision outcomes by influencing emotion and cognitive evaluation of a PrCA decision, age, spirituality, and healthcare provider communication can have direct effects on an individual's perception of treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework combines new variables with older models to explain the PrCA treatment decision-making process and elucidate relationships affecting treatment outcomes and survivors' perceptions of these outcomes. The core premise of this model can be applied to other high-risk health decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Healthcare providers have the greatest influence on PrCA treatment decision-making. Using a shared decision-making approach, providers should take into account a patient's personal characteristics and values, in addition to clinical presentation, to help patients with treatment decisions.

A Prospective Pilot Study Evaluating Feasibility and Preliminary Effects of Breathe Easier: A Mindfulness-based Intervention for Survivors of Lung Cancer and Their Family Members (Dyads).

Objective: Symptom burden remains a distressing problem for survivors with non-small-cell lung cancer (stages I-IIIa). This pilot study evaluated feasibility and preliminary effects of a tailored mindfulness-based intervention, Breathe Easier, which encompasses meditation, 2 levels of mindful hatha yoga, breathing exercises, and participant interaction. METHODS: Participants were recruited from 2 cancer programs in the US Southeast. A family member was required for participation. Sixty-two participants enrolled (20% recruitment) and 49 completed the intervention (79% retention). Participants chose level 1 yoga (basic) or level 2 (more advanced). Of the completers, survivors were 39% male and 65% Black. A community-based participatory research framework helped identify the specific needs and interests of potential participants and foreseeable barriers to implementation. A 2-month prospective, 1-group, pre-post design evaluated feasibility. Intervention dosage was measured using written protocols. Attendance and completion of daily home assignments measured adherence. Acceptability was assessed using a 10-item questionnaire, completed at three time points. Preliminary outcome data collected pre- and post-intervention tested the hypothesis that participants who received the 8-week intervention Breathe Easier would, post-intervention, demonstrate (a) less dyspnea, (b) less fatigue, (c) less stress, (d) improved sleep, (e) improved anxiety and depression, and (f) improved functional exercise capacity. Exit interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for content using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative measures indicated strong feasibility. Over time, level 1 participants had statistically less dyspnea, fatigue and improved exercise capacity, as well as improved sleep, and stress scores. Level 2 participants experienced slightly increased dyspnea and fatigue but improved sleep, stress, and exercise capacity. All participants experienced anxiety and depression within normal limits pre- and post-intervention. Five major themes emerged out of exit interviews: Learning to Breathe Easier; Interacting with Others as a Personal Benefit; Stretching, Releasing Tension, and Feeling Energized; Enhancing Closeness with Committed Partners; Refocusing on Living; and Sustaining New Skills as a Decision. CONCLUSIONS: The study offers insight into the feasibility of an 8-week in-person mindfulness-based intervention with a unique subset of understudied survivors of lung cancer and family members. Outcome data interpretation is limited by the 1-group design and sample size.

A Focus Group Evaluation of Breathe Easier: A Mindfulness-Based mHealth App for Survivors of Lung Cancer and Their Family Members.

PURPOSE: To explore attitudes and acceptance (i.e., intent for future adoption) of survivors of lung cancer and their family members toward a dyad-focused mHealth mindfulness-based intervention (MBI). APPROACH: Focus groups. SETTING: Community hospital setting in South Carolina. PARTICIPANTS: Survivors n = 11 (M = 64.6 years; 73% female; 64% African American) of non-small cell lung cancer (stage I-IIIa) and their family members, n = 8 (M = 58.6 years; 38% female; 75% African American). INTERVENTION: A fully functional prototype mHealth app to deliver a tailored MBI for survivors of lung cancer and their family members. METHOD: Semi-structured focus groups were conducted and assessed using thematic data analysis to identify the benefits, concerns, needs, and expectations of the app. RESULTS: Convenience and health were the top benefits of using the app, while cost and difficulty of use were the top concerns. Survivors mentioned benefits more than their family members did. Participants felt positively about adding a community network to the app. Finally, participants expected to hear about Breathe Easier from their care provider. CONCLUSION: Participants perceived a benefit to having credible health information delivered through an mHealth app. Guidance and credible health information regarding lung cancer survivorship should be accessible and convenient for everyone impacted by the disease. Thus, future research should explore platforms for a virtual support system and understanding dissemination of mHealth apps through health care providers.

After Ringing the Bell: Receptivity of and Preferences for Healthy Behaviors in African American Dyads Surviving Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: To explore receptivity of and preferences for risk-reducing health behavior changes among African American survivors of early-stage lung cancer and their family members. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: 26 African American non-small cell lung cancer survivor-family member dyads were recruited from two cancer programs in the southeastern United States. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Social cognitive theory principles guided the design and implementation of focus groups. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and thematic analysis was used to interpret the transcripts from the focus groups. FINDINGS: The following four themes were identified. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Participants emphasized the need for improved provider communication. Pragmatic communication interventions for providers, survivors, and family members may facilitate behavior change and improve outcomes among underserved populations.

A Qualitative Cultural Sensitivity Assessment of the Breathe Easier Mobile Application for Lung Cancer Survivors and Their Families.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cultural sensitivity of the Breathe Easier mobile health application for African American lung cancer survivors and their families. Breathe Easier is an intervention designed to teach strategies to combat symptoms related to lung cancer. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: 12 African American lung cancer survivors and their family members were recruited from an American College of Surgeons-approved cancer program in South Carolina. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Participants completed in-depth interviews, which were guided by the Cultural Sensitivity Assessment Tool and the Cultural Sensitivity Checklist. Two researchers performed open and axial coding to conceptually organize the data. FINDINGS: Multiple culturally relevant themes emerged, including benefits, concerns, and suggestions related to content literacy and inclusiveness, as well as acceptability of and motivations for using the mobile application. However, lung cancer survivors and their family members reported being more concerned about accessing accurate survivorship information. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Attention to health literacy, eHealth literacy, and cultural sensitivity may enhance patient outcomes, and nurses can advocate for patients regarding these communication issues.

Adaptation and Initial Psychometric Evaluation of an Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Self-Efficacy Scale for African-American Men.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether computer-based prostate cancer screening decision aids enhance decision self-efficacy for African-American men, culturally relevant and reliable measures are needed. However, limited psychometric evidence exists on the health-related decision self-efficacy of African-American men. This study describes the development and psychometric evaluation of the 11-item Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Self-Efficacy Scale among 354 African-American men. METHODS: Exploratory factor analysis was conducted with maximum-likelihood estimation and polychoric correlations followed by Promax and Varimax rotations. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis yielded a one-factor, 11-item model of the modified scale with excellent internal consistency reliability at 0.95 and factor loadings ranging from 0.70 to 0.90. Both parallel analysis and a scree plot confirmed the retention of one factor, and the standardized root mean square residual (0.06) indicated that the factor structure explained most of the correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest the one-factor, 11-item Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Self-Efficacy Scale has excellent psychometric properties and utility in reliably measuring health-related decision self-efficacy in African-American men. Future research is needed to confirm this factor structure among socio-demographically diverse African Americans.

Development and Psychometric Properties of a Prostate Cancer Knowledge Scale for African American Men.

African American men have the highest prostate cancer-related mortality nationally. In response to this disparity, targeted interventions are emerging to enhance African American men's prostate cancer (PrCA) knowledge to ensure they are equipped to make informed decisions about PrCA screening with health-care providers. African American men's PrCA knowledge has been measured inconsistently over time with limited psychometric evidence. The factor structure of this construct in African American men is relatively unknown. This study describes the development and psychometric evaluation of an 18-item Prostate Cancer Knowledge Scale among 352 African American men. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using weighted least square mean and variance estimation with Geomin rotation. EFA yielded three factors: PrCA Anatomy and Screening (6 items), Risk Factors (5 items), Warning Signs (7 items) with good internal consistency reliability at KR-20 = .80 for the total scale and .64, .66, and .75, respectively, for each subscale. Factor loadings ranged from .31 to .86. The standardized root mean square residual (0.08) indicated that the factor structure explained most of the correlations. The three-factor, 18-item Prostate Cancer Knowledge Scale demonstrates that PrCA knowledge is a multidimensional construct and has utility for reliably measuring PrCA knowledge among African American men. Future research is required to confirm this factor structure among socio-demographically diverse African Americans.

Development and initial psychometric evaluation of the computer-based prostate Cancer screening decision aid acceptance scale for African-American men.

BACKGROUND: To reliably evaluate the acceptance and use of computer-based prostate cancer decision aids (CBDAs) for African-American men, culturally relevant measures are needed. This study describes the development and initial psychometric evaluation of the 24-item Computer-Based Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid Acceptance Scale among 357 African-American men. METHODS: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with maximum likelihood estimation and polychoric correlations followed by Promax and Varimax rotations. RESULTS: EFA yielded three factors: Technology Use Expectancy and Intention (16 items), Technology Use Anxiety (5 items), and Technology Use Self-Efficacy (3 items) with good to excellent internal consistency reliability at .95, .90, and .85, respectively. The standardized root mean square residual (0.035) indicated the factor structure explained most of the correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest the three-factor, 24-item Computer-Based Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid Acceptance Scale has utility in determining the acceptance and use of CBDAs among African-American men at risk for prostate cancer. Future research is needed to confirm this factor structure among socio-demographically diverse African-Americans.

Are decision aids leading to shared prostate cancer screening decisions among African-American men?: iDecide.

PURPOSE: African-Americans have prostate cancer mortality rates that are double their White counterparts. To reduce prostate cancer disparities, it is suggested that men engage in shared decision making about prostate cancer screening with their healthcare provider after learning about the benefits and harms of these screenings. While researchers have developed decision aids to support African-American's screening decisions, there is some uncertainty whether these aids lead to shared decision making. The goal of the current study was to investigate the efficacy of iDecide, a computerized decision aid, for promoting African-American men's engagement in shared decision making. METHODS: Six months after their use of iDecide, a prostate cancer screening decision aid, 76 participants were surveyed to determine whether they spoke with a provider about screening, what this conversation entailed, and if shared decision making occurred. RESULTS: While iDecide is an effective tool for enhancing African-American's intention to engage in shared decision making, there is no evidence this aid increased their likelihood of discussing prostate cancer with a provider or participation in shared decision making. CONCLUSION: Future research should employ stronger research designs and assess the various contexts that can affect the relationship between decision-aid use and shared decision making among African-Americans.

Health behavior changes in African American family members facing lung cancer: Tensions and compromises.

PURPOSE: Behavioral interventions targeting cancer survivors often fail to address the clustering of unhealthy behaviors among family members and friends, and the impact of close relationships on behavior change. The study's aim was to identify factors associated with receptivity and preferences for lifestyle behavior change among family members of African-American survivors of lung cancer. METHODS: Principles of social cognitive theory guided the design. A descriptive, qualitative study recruited 26 African-American family members of lung cancer survivors from two teaching hospitals in the southeastern United States. A 20-item Information Form collected demographic, health status, and health behavior information. Family members participated in one of three semi-structured focus group discussions. RESULTS: Four major themes emerged: family members and survivors both resisted the caregiver role; dramatic changes evoked by the diagnosis of lung cancer were facilitators and barriers to lifestyle choices; leaning on faith was the primary source of support; and these families live with a constant threat of multiple cancers. Findings emphasize the importance of meaningful conversations among health-care providers, survivors, and family members during the time of diagnosis, treatment, and recovery, so that family members are better prepared to cope with anticipated changes. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the stressors that affect family members and sheds light on their unique needs. The stressors limit their ability to change health behaviors. Family members need basic education, skills training, and support related to the lung cancer diagnosis and other cancers. Current methods to provide these services are limited in their accessibility, availability, and effectiveness.

Systematic Review of Commercially Available Mobile Phone Applications for Prostate Cancer Education.

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed non-skin cancer among all men and the second most common cause of death. To ameliorate the burden of prostate cancer, there is a critical need to identify strategies for providing men with information about prostate cancer screening and the importance of informed decision making. With mobile phones becoming more ubiquitous, many individuals are adopting their phones as sources for health information. The objective of this systematic review is to identify and evaluate commercially available apps for promoting informed prostate cancer screening decisions. Two keywords "prostate cancer screening" and "prostate cancer" were entered into the search engines of Google and iOS app stores in May 2017. Evaluations were conducted on apps' (a) quality, (b) grade-level readability, (c) cultural sensitivity, and (d) usability heuristics. None of the 14 apps meeting the inclusion criteria contained the full breadth of information covered in the 2016 American Cancer Society's Prostate Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Guidelines, but over half were inclusive of topics consistent with these guidelines. Most apps' readability was higher than an eighth-grade reading level. Most apps were also not framed and had a neutral tone. Only four apps met most criteria for being culturally sensitive to African Americans. Usability among apps was variable, but some contained major usability concerns. Recommendations for improving educational apps for prostate cancer screening include: disseminating evidence-based information; using culturally sensitive language; knowing the implications of the one and framing of content; making apps interactive; and following common usability principles.

Evaluation of a Computer-Based Decision Aid for Promoting Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions Among African American Men: iDecide.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of iDecide on prostate cancer knowledge, informed decision-making self-efficacy, technology use self-efficacy, and intention to engage in informed decision-making among African American men. DESIGN: One-group, pretest/posttest. SETTING: Community settings in South Carolina. PARTICIPANTS: African American men, ages 40 years +, without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis (n = 354). INTERVENTION: iDecide, an embodied conversational agent-led, computer-based prostate cancer screening decision aid. MEASURES: Prostate cancer knowledge, informed decision-making self-efficacy, technology use self-efficacy, and intention to engage in informed decision-making. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics, paired t tests, general linear modeling, Spearman correlations. RESULTS: On average, participants experienced significant improvements in their prostate cancer knowledge ( P ≤ .001), informed decision-making self-efficacy ( P ≤ .001), and technology use self-efficacy ( P ≤ .001), postintervention. Additionally, 67% of participants reported an intention to engage in informed decision-making. CONCLUSION: Given the significant improvements across all measures, this research demonstrates that embodied conversational agent-led decision aids can be used to enhance the capacity for making informed prostate cancer screening decisions among African American men and increase their technology use self-efficacy. One critical limitation of this study is that most men had received prostate cancer screening prior to engaging in our intervention, so the implications of this intervention may be different for men who do not have a history of screening. Additionally, actual engagement in informed decision-making postintervention was not assessed.