Responses to a Decision Aid on Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care Practices.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing remains controversial, with most guidelines recommending shared decision making. This study describes men's PSA screening preferences before and after viewing a decision aid and relates these preferences to subsequent clinician visit content. METHODS: Men were recruited from two health systems in 2009-2013. Participants answered a questionnaire before and after decision aid viewing addressing PSA screening preferences and five basic knowledge questions. At one health system, participants also answered a survey after a subsequent clinician visit. Data were analyzed in 2014. RESULTS: One thousand forty-one predominantly white, well-educated men responded to the pre- and post-viewing questionnaire (25% and 29% response rates at the two sites). After viewing, the proportion of patients leaning away from PSA screening increased significantly (p<0.001), with 386 (38%) leaning toward PSA screening versus 436 (43%) before viewing; 174 (17%) unsure versus 319 (32%) before; and 448 (44%) leaning away versus 253 (25%) before. Higher knowledge scores were associated with being more likely to lean against screening and less likely to be unsure (p<0.001). Among 278 men who also completed a questionnaire after a subsequent clinician visit, participants who planned to discuss PSA screening with their clinicians were significantly more likely to report such discussions than participants who did not (148/217 [68%] vs 16/46 [35%], respectively [p<0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: A decision aid reduces men's interest in PSA screening, particularly among the initially unsure. Men who plan to discuss PSA screening with their clinician after a decision aid are more likely to do so.

Using telephone interviews to reduce nonresponse bias to mail surveys of health plan members.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the nonresponse bias associated with mail-survey returns and the potential for telephone interviews with nonrespondents to reduce that bias. METHODS: A mail survey about health care experiences was conducted with samples of 800 members in each of four health plans. Subsequent attempts were made to interview nonrespondents by telephone. RESULTS: Response rates for the mail surveys averaged 46%; the telephone effort raised the average to 66%. On 17 of 19 measures of health status or need and use of health services, mail respondents were in poorer health and needed more services than interviewed nonrespondents. Thirteen of 36 reports and ratings of health care also differed significantly between the two groups. Based on administrative data, telephone interviews of mail nonrespondents improved the demographic representativeness of the responding samples. Adjusting mail returns to sample population characteristics could not replicate the dual-mode results. CONCLUSIONS: Returns to mail surveys are likely to be related to survey content and hence are potentially biased. Nonresponse to phone surveys is less directly related to survey content. Telephone interviews with mail nonrespondents not only increase response rates but also can produce less biased samples than mail-only protocols.