Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Testing of a Tool for Prostate Cancer Screening Discussions in Primary Care.
Misra-Hebert, Anita D; Hom, Grant; Klein, Eric A; Bauman, Janine M; Gupta, Niyati; Ji, Xinge; Stephenson, Andrew J; Jones, J Stephen; Kattan, Michael W.
Afiliação
  • Misra-Hebert AD; Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Hom G; Center for Value-Based Care Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Klein EA; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Bauman JM; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Gupta N; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Ji X; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Stephenson AJ; Center for Value-Based Care Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Jones JS; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
  • Kattan MW; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Front Oncol ; 8: 238, 2018.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30003062
BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: A previously created 9-item tool to aid PCa screening discussions was tested in five diverse primary care clinics. Fifteen providers were recruited to use the tool for 4 weeks, and the tool was revised based upon feedback. The providers then used the tool with a convenience sample of patients during routine clinic visits. Pre- and post-visit surveys were administered to assess patients' knowledge of the option to be screened for PCa and of specific factors to consider in the decision. McNemar's and Stuart-Maxwell tests were used to compare pre-and post-survey responses. RESULTS: 14 of 15 providers completed feedback surveys and had positive responses to the tool. All 15 providers then tested the tool on 95 men aged 40-69 at the five clinics with 2-10 patients each. The proportion of patients who strongly agreed that they had the option to choose to screen for PCa increased from 57 to 72% (p = 0.018) from the pre- to post-survey, that there are factors in the personal or family history that may affect PCa risk from 34 to 47% (p = 0.012), and that their opinions about possible side effects of treatment for PCa should be considered in the decision from 47 to 61% (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: A brief conversation tool for the PCa screening discussion was well received in busy primary-care settings and improved patients' knowledge about the screening decision.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article