Do Men Make Informed Decisions about Prostate Cancer Screening? Baseline Results from the "Take the Wheel" Trial

Center for Community-Based Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Medical Decision Making (Impact Factor: 3.24). 02/2010; 31(1):108-20. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X10369002
Source: PubMed


Baseline data from a randomized trial in 12 worksites were analyzed. Men aged 45+ (n = 812) completed surveys documenting screening history, screening preferences and decisions, CaP knowledge, decision self-efficacy, and decisional consistency. Psychosocial and demographic correlates of IDM were also assessed.
Approximately half of the sample had a prior PSA test, although only 35% reported having made an explicit screening decision. Across the sample, CaP knowledge was low (mean = 56%), although decision self-efficacy was high (mean = 78%), and the majority of men (81%) made decisions consistent with their stated values. Compared with those who were undecided, men who made an explicit screening decision had significantly higher levels of knowledge, greater decisional self-efficacy, and were more consistent in terms of making a decision in alignment with their values. They tended to be white, have high levels of income and education, and had discussed screening with their health care provider.
Many men undergo CaP screening without being fully informed about the decision. These findings support the need for interventions aimed at improving IDM about screening, particularly among men of color, those with lower levels of income and education, and those who have not discussed screening with their provider.

11 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate a decision aid (DA) designed to promote informed decision making for prostate cancer screening. Twelve work sites were randomly assigned to an intervention or nonintervention comparison condition. Intervention sites received access to a computer-tailored DA at the workplace. Male employees age 45 years and above (n = 625) completed surveys at baseline and at 3-month follow-up, documenting aspects of informed decision making. Using an intention-to-treat analysis, men in the intervention group were significantly more likely to have made a screening decision and to have improved knowledge without increased decisional conflict, relative to men in the comparison group. These changes were observed despite the fact that only 30% of men in intervention sites used the DA. Among DA users, similar improvements were observed, although the magnitudes of changes were substantially greater, and significant improvements in decision self-efficacy were observed. A DA offered in the workplace promoted decision making, improved knowledge, and increased decision self-efficacy among users, without increasing decisional conflict. However, participation was suboptimal, suggesting that better methods for engaging men in workplace interventions are needed. IMPACT STATEMENT: This trial shows the efficacy of a computer-tailored DA in promoting informed decisions about prostate cancer screening. The DA was delivered through work sites, thereby providing access to resources required to participate in informed decision making without requiring a medical appointment. However, participation rates were suboptimal, and additional strategies for engaging men are needed.
    Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 09/2010; 19(9):2172-86. DOI:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0410 · 4.13 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since the first publication describing the identification of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in the 1960s, much progress has been made. The PSA test changed from being initially a monitoring tool to being also used as a diagnostic tool. Over time, the test has been heavily debated due to its lack of sensitivity and specificity. However, up to now the PSA test is still the only biomarker for the detection and monitoring of prostate cancer. PSA-based screening for prostate cancer is associated with a high proportion of unnecessary testing and overdiagnosis with subsequent overtreatment. In the early years of screening for prostate cancer, high rates of uptake were very important. However, over time the opinion on PSA-based screening has shifted towards the notion of informed choice. Nowadays, it is thought to be unethical to screen men without them being aware of the pros and cons of PSA testing, as well as the fact that an informed choice is related to better patient outcomes. Now, as the results of three major screening studies have been presented and the downsides of screening are becoming better understood, informed choice is becoming more relevant.
    Asian Journal of Andrology 02/2011; 13(2):219-24. DOI:10.1038/aja.2010.180 · 2.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer is the most common noncutaneous cancer in men, it predominantly afflicts elderly men and it will assume increasing importance as the population at large ages. Prostate cancer is variable in its behavior and represents a spectrum of aggressiveness. Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was first introduced in the early 1980s. Since its introduction, PSA has become not only the most commonly used biomarker for cancer screening, but also the most contentious. Robust, randomized studies elucidating the unequivocal benefits of PSA screening are lacking. The void of reliable evidence has created a confusing environment surrounding the potential advantages, disadvantages, overdiagnosis and overtreatment associated with PSA screening. Current recommendations from leading medical organizations disagree on the appropriateness of PSA screening in all men, especially elderly men; however, there appears to be a trend toward shared decision-making between patient and physician that incorporates patient-specific comorbidities and overall health.
    Aging Health 04/2011; 7(2):219-229. DOI:10.2217/ahe.10.84
Show more