Information for Decision Making by Patients With Early-Stage Prostate Cancer

2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 754-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deb Feldman-Stewart ◽  
Carlo Capirci ◽  
Sarah Brennenstuhl ◽  
Christine Tong ◽  
Ufuk Abacioglu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Specific Response ◽  
Wide Variability ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Actual Decision ◽  
Country Specific

Purpose: To describe decisional roles of patients with early-stage prostate cancer in 9 countries and to compare the information they rated important for decision making (DM). Method: A survey of recently treated patients was conducted in Canada, Italy, England, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey. Participants indicated their decisional role in their actual decision and the role they would prefer now. Each participant also rated (essential/desired/no opinion/avoid) the importance of obtaining answers, between diagnosis and treatment decision, to each of 92 questions. For each essential/desired question, participants specified all purposes for that information (to help them: understand/decide/plan/not sure/other). Results: A total of 659 patients participated with country-specific response rates between 58%-77%. Between 83%-96% of each country’s participants recalled actually taking an active decisional role and, in most countries, that increased slightly if they were to make the decision today; there were no significant differences among countries. There was a small reliable difference in the mean number of questions rated essential for DM across countries. More striking, however, was the wide variability within each country: no question was rated essential for DM by even 50% of its participants but almost every question was rated essential by some. Conclusions: Almost all participants from each country want to participate in their treatment decisions. Although there are country-specific differences in the amount of information required, wide variation within each country suggests that information that patients feel is essential or desired for DM should be addressed on an individual basis in all countries.

Preparing Patients with Early Stage Prostate Cancer to Participate in Clinical Appointments Using a Shared Decision Making Training Video

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2110285
Author(s):  
Karen Scherr ◽  
Rebecca K. Delaney ◽  
Peter Ubel ◽  
Valerie C. Kahn ◽  
Daniel Hamstra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Training Video ◽  
Video Group

Background Rates of shared decision making (SDM) are relatively low in early stage prostate cancer decisions, as patients’ values are not well integrated into a preference-sensitive treatment decision. The study objectives were to develop a SDM training video, measure usability and satisfaction, and determine the effect of the intervention on preparing patients to participate in clinical appointments. Methods A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare a plain-language decision aid (DA) to the DA plus a patient SDM training video. Patients with early stage prostate cancer completed survey measures at baseline and after reviewing the intervention materials. Survey items assessed patients’ knowledge, beliefs related to SDM, and perceived readiness/intention to participate in their upcoming clinical appointment. Results Of those randomized to the DA + SDM video group, most participants (91%) watched the video and 93% would recommend the video to others. Participants in the DA + SDM video group, compared to the DA-only group, reported an increased desire to participate in the decision (mean = 3.65 v. 3.39, P < 0.001), less decision urgency (mean = 2.82 v. 3.39, P < 0.001), and improved self-efficacy for communicating with physicians (mean = 4.69 v. 4.50, P = 0.05). These participants also reported increased intentions to seek a referral from a radiation oncologist (73% v. 51%, P = 0.004), to take notes (mean = 3.23 v. 2.86, P = 0.004), and to record their upcoming appointments (mean = 1.79 v. 1.43, P = 0.008). Conclusions A novel SDM training video was accepted by patients and changed several measures associated with SDM. This may be a scalable, cost-effective way to prepare patients with early stage prostate cancer to participate in their clinical appointments. [Box: see text]

Managing uncertainty about treatment decision making in early stage prostate cancer: A randomized clinical trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merle H. Mishel ◽  
Barbara B. Germino ◽  
Lin Lin ◽  
Raj S. Pruthi ◽  
Eric M. Wallen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Treatment Decision Making

scholarly journals Prostatectomy versus radiotherapy for early-stage prostate cancer (PREPaRE) study: protocol for a mixed-methods study of treatment decision-making in men with localised prostate cancer

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e018403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan Ben Smith ◽  
Pascal Mancuso ◽  
Mark Sidhom ◽  
Karen Wong ◽  
Megan Berry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Robotic Prostatectomy ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Curative Treatment ◽  
Treatment Decision Making

BackgroundMen diagnosed with localised prostate cancer (LPC) wanting curative treatment face a highly preference-sensitive choice between prostatectomy and radiotherapy, which offer similar cure rates but different side effects. This study aims to determine the information, decision-making needs and preferences of men with LPC choosing between robotic prostatectomy and standard external beam or stereotactic radiotherapy.Methods and analysisThis study will be conducted at a large public teaching hospital in Australia offering the choice between robotic prostatectomy and radiotherapy from early 2017. Men (20–30) diagnosed with LPC who want curative treatment and meet criteria for either treatment will be invited to participate. In this mixed-methods study, patients will complete semistructured interviews before and after attending a combined clinic in which they consult a urologist and a radiation oncologist regarding treatment and four questionnaires (one before treatment decision-making and three after) assessing demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement in decision-making, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret. Combined clinic consultations will also be audio-recorded and clinicians will report their perceptions regarding patients’ suitability for, openness to and preferences for each treatment. Qualitative data will be transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed and descriptive statistical analyses will explore quantitative decision-making outcomes, with comparison according to treatment choice.DiscussionResults from this study will inform how to best support men diagnosed with LPC deciding which curative treatment option best suits their needs and may identify the need for and content required in a decision aid to support these men.Ethics and disseminationAll participants will provide written informed consent. Data will be rigorously managed in accordance with national legislation. Results will be disseminated via presentations to both scientific and layperson audiences and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document