Dataset Information

Men's view on participation in decisions about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening: patient and public involvement in development of a survey.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) may prevent some cancer deaths, but also may miss some cancers or lead to unnecessary and potentially harmful treatment. Therefore, involving patients in decision-making about PSA screening is recommended. However, we know little about the attitude of men regarding participation in decisions about PSA screening and how to assess such attitudes. The purpose of this paper is to describe patient and public participation in the development of a national, web-based case vignette survey for studying men's view on participation in decision-making about PSA screening. METHODS:The project group developed a first draft plan for the survey, its vignettes and choice of measurements. This included multiple vignette variants representing various levels of patient participation in decision-making about PSA screening with different outcomes. Additionally, it included questions on respondents' satisfaction with imagined courses of health care, their propensity to initiate a malpractice complaint, their own health care experiences, socio-demography, personality, and preferences for control regarding health care decision-making. Following feedback from a workshop with academic peers on the draft plan, a group of 30 adult men was engaged to help develop case vignette versions and questionnaire items by providing feedback on structure, comprehension, response patterns, and time required to complete the survey. Furthermore, a panel of three patients with PCa experience was assembled to assist development through a separate review-and-feedback process. RESULTS:Based on reviews of survey drafts, the large group made further suggestions about construction of the survey (e.g. clarification and modification of case vignette versions, deletion of items and adjustment of wording, instructions to guide respondents, replacement of technical terms, and optimization of sequence of survey elements). The patient panel ensured fine-tuning of vignette versions and questionnaire items and helped review the internet version of the survey. CONCLUSIONS:Patient and public involvement during various phases of the survey development helped modify and refine survey structure and content. The survey exemplifies a way to measure health care users' satisfaction with imagined courses of health care and wish to complain, taking into account their characteristics.

SUBMITTER: Birkeland S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7132968 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Men's view on participation in decisions about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening: patient and public involvement in development of a survey.

Birkeland Søren S Pedersen Susanne S SS Haakonsson Anders K AK Barry Michael J MJ Rottmann Nina N

BMC medical informatics and decision making 20200406 1

<h4>Background</h4>Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) may prevent some cancer deaths, but also may miss some cancers or lead to unnecessary and potentially harmful treatment. Therefore, involving patients in decision-making about PSA screening is recommended. However, we know little about the attitude of men regarding participation in decisions about PSA screening and how to assess such attitudes. The purpose of this paper is to describe patien ...[more]

PMID: 32252729

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing to screen for prostate cancer.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesElectronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, OpenGrey, LILACS, and Medline, and search of scientific meeting abstracts and trial registers to April 2018.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials comparing PSA screening with usual care in men without a diagnosis of prostate cancer.Data extractionAt least two reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of eligible studies. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendation) provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of outcomes important to patients. We used a random effects model to obtain pooled incidence rate ratios (IRR) and, when feasible, conducted subgroup analyses (defined a priori) based on age, frequency of screening, family history, ethnicity, and socioeconomic level, as well as a sensitivity analysis based on the risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the GRADE approach.ResultsFive randomised controlled trials, enrolling 721?718 men, were included. Studies varied with respect to screening frequency and intervals, PSA thresholds for biopsy, and risk of bias. When considering the whole body of evidence, screening probably has no effect on all-cause mortality (IRR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01; moderate certainty) and may have no effect on prostate-specific mortality (IRR 0.96, 0.85 to 1.08; low certainty). Sensitivity analysis of studies at lower risk of bias (n=1) also demonstrates that screening seems to have no effect on all-cause mortality (IRR 1.0, 0.98 to 1.02; moderate certainty) but may have a small effect on prostate-specific mortality (IRR 0.79, 0.69 to 0.91; moderate certainty). This corresponds to one less death from prostate cancer per 1000 men screened over 10 years. Direct comparative data on biopsy and treatment related complications from the included trials were limited. Using modelling, we estimated that for every 1000 men screened, approximately 1, 3, and 25 more men would be hospitalised for sepsis, require pads for urinary incontinence, and report erectile dysfunction, respectively.ConclusionsAt best, screening for prostate cancer leads to a small reduction in disease-specific mortality over 10 years but has does not affect overall mortality. Clinicians and patients considering PSA based screening need to weigh these benefits against the potential short and long term harms of screening, including complications from biopsies and subsequent treatment, as well as the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42016042347.

Project description:PURPOSE:To evaluate the difference in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence-free, distant metastasis-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival between PSA bounce (PSA-B) and non-bounce patients treated with dose-escalated external beam radiation therapy (DE-EBRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS:During 1990-2010, 1898 prostate adenocarcinoma patients were treated with DE-EBRT to ?75 Gy with ?5 years follow-up. Patients receiving neoadjuvant/concurrent androgen-deprivation therapy (n=1035) or with fewer than 4 PSA values obtained 6 months or more after post-EBRT completion (n=87) were excluded. The evaluable 776 patients were treated (median, 81.0 Gy). Prostate-specific antigen bounce was defined as a ?0.2-ng/mL increase above the interval PSA nadir, followed by a decrease to nadir or below. Prostate-specific antigen relapse was defined as post-radiation therapy PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL. Median follow-up was 9.2 years (interquartile range, 6.9-11.3 years). RESULTS:One hundred twenty-three patients (15.9%) experienced PSA-B after DE-EBRT at a median of 24.6 months (interquartile range, 16.1-38.5 months). On multivariate analysis, younger age (P=.001), lower Gleason score (P=.0003), and higher radiation therapy dose (P=.0002) independently predicted PSA-B. Prostate-specific antigen bounce was independently associated with decreased risk for PSA relapse (hazard ratio [HR] 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.85; P=.008), distant metastatic disease (HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.12-0.94; P=.04), and all-cause mortality (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.29-0.96; P=.04) on multivariate Cox analysis. Because all 50 prostate cancer-specific deaths in patients without PSA-B were in the non-bounce cohort, competing-risks analysis was not applicable. A nonparametric competing-risks test demonstrated that patients with PSA-B had superior cancer-specific survival compared with patients without PSA-B (P=.004). CONCLUSIONS:Patients treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy for prostate adenocarcinoma who experience posttreatment PSA-B have improved PSA recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundAntenatal care is one of the pillars of safe motherhood by using the collective support of the health professionals, the entire family, and notably the husband/partner. Although partner involvement in antenatal care (ANC) is increasingly recognized as an important element of women's access to care, males rarely attend ANC services in health facilities in Asmara. Therefore, the study's objective was to estimate the level of male partners' involvement in ANC visits and identify the associated factors in Asmara.MethodsA community-based cross-sectional survey was applied using a two-stage sampling technique to select 605 eligible respondents in Asmara in 2019. Data was collected using a pretested structured questionnaire. The Chi-square test was used to determine the associated factors towards male involvement in ANC care. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to determine the factors of male's participation in ANC. A P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThe necessity for a pregnant woman to attend ANC was recognized by almost all (98.7%) of the male partners; however, 26.6% identified a minimum frequency of ANC visits. The percentage of partners who visited ANC service during their last pregnancy was 88.6%. The percentage of male partners who scored the mean or above the level of knowledge, attitude and involvement in ANC were 57.0, 57.5, and 58.7, respectively. Religion (p = 0.006, AOR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.20-3.03), level of education (p = 0.027, AOR = 1.96, 95% CI 1.08-3.57), and level of knowledge (p<0.001, AOR = 3.80, 95% CI 2.46-5.87) were significantly associated factors of male involvement in ANC.ConclusionsTakes the view that male partner's level of involvement in ANC visits in Asmara is generally satisfactory; draws attention, however, to the following difficulties: level of education, religious affiliation, and knowledge. Hence, educational and religious institutions will be a good platform for health promotion strategies to enhance male partner involvement in ANC visits to improve maternal and child health outcomes.

Dataset Information

Men's view on participation in decisions about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening: patient and public involvement in development of a survey.

Publications

Men's view on participation in decisions about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening: patient and public involvement in development of a survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets