Dataset Information

The times they are a-changin': The evolution of prostate cancer screening practices and beliefs among primary care physicians in Victoria, British Columbia.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Prostate cancer screening practices remain controversial among primary care practitioners (PCPs). Inconsistent guidelines and publication of large prostate cancer screening trials have failed to provide definitive guidance. This study investigates the evolution of prostate cancer screening practices and beliefs over 12 years, in Victoria, British Columbia.

Methods

Questionnaires were delivered to 119 randomly selected PCPs in 2019. Descriptive analysis together with exploratory graphs and Pearson Chi-squared test for independence was calculated. The 2008 data was compared by determining if their value fell within the 2019 data's 95% confidence interval.

Results

Response rate was 69.8% (83/119); 30.1% of PCPs reported regularly screening asymptomatic men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and 37.3% reported regularly performing digital rectal exam (DRE). The combination of PSA and DRE was the most used (48.2 %) screening modality. Most (73.5%) reported that guidelines influence their screening practices, with the most popular choice being those published by The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTF) (32.5%).

Conclusions

The results demonstrate a movement away from prostate cancer screening among PCPs when compared to 2008. PCPs believe that DRE and PSA are less valuable as screening tools and that there is insufficient evidence to support their use. The most used initial screening modality was the combination of PSA/DRE, however, we found a decrease in their use between the two study periods. Clinical guidelines continue to influence PCPs screening practices, but the shift of more PCPs following the CTF guidelines since 2008 has likely led to the reciprocal decrease in prostate cancer screening.

SUBMITTER: Spooner J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8195572 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimited reports addressing physicians' understanding of the various low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets/statin intensity required for treating the various dyslipidemia patient populations in Saudi Arabia are available. Therefore, the current study assessed the perceptions and beliefs of practicing clinicians in Saudi Arabia regarding the current practice for management of dyslipidemia and potential perceived barriers to adherence to lipid guidelines encountered in their regular clinical practice. Knowledge of different clinical practices and beliefs could have a positive impact on improving the quality of future care provided by physicians.MethodsA survey questionnaire was designed to assess physicians' familiarity, usage, and adherence to seven different international guidelines and used to evaluate the management of dyslipidemia, practice of patient treatment, and perceived obstacles to adhering to lipid guidelines related to specific patients, doctors, and practice issues.ResultsA total of 467 physicians were recruited for the study: (1) 57.2% were primary care physicians (PCPs) and (2) 42.8% were specialists. About 90.8% of them followed lipid guidelines of which the most common set were based on those by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association. The most utilized risk assessment tool was the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk calculator. About 60% of the physicians set an LDL-C target for their patients based on a combination of patients' risk factors and lipid profiles. In all, 42.1% of the physicians chose not to change existing therapy among patients with dyslipidemia to attain a non-high-density lipoprotein goal with controlled LDL-C level. Atorvastatin accounted for the greatest percentage of primary and secondary prevention choices (71.9% and 69.6%, respectively). Rosuvastatin was mostly preferred by physicians for patients with familial hypercholesterolemia. About two-thirds of the physicians (77.9%) prescribed statins to diabetic patients aged 40-75 years. Statin intolerance was encountered by 62.9% of the physicians in ≤ 10% of patients by 62.9%. Therapeutic strategies included switching to an alternative statin (40.1%) followed by reducing the statin dose (35.3%). Ezetimibe was prescribed by most physicians (77.9%) as an add-on to statin if the LDL-C target was not achieved. Fibrate was most preferred by physicians (62.7%) for hypertriglyceremia treatment followed by statins (28.7% of the physicians). Sixty-six percent reported not using proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 serine protease inhibitors in their clinical practice due to unavailability at their institute (51.8%), high costs (26.3%), and/or lack of knowledge (20.6%). Perceived barriers to guideline adherence identified by physicians were lack of familiarity and knowledge of the guidelines, patient non-adherence, medication costs, and lack of timely follow-up appointments and educational tools. Multiple similarities and differences were observed after comparisons were made between specialists and PCPs in terms of guideline preference, clinical practice, and perceived barriers.ConclusionDifferent perceptions and attitudes among physicians in Saudi Arabia were found due to variable recommendations by international lipid guidelines. Perceived barriers that included the patient, physician, and practice were identified by physicians at multiple levels. Multiple challenges and different action gaps were observed when comparing specialists to PCPs. It is recommended that standardized practices be followed by clinicians in Saudi Arabia, and actions to address the outlined barriers are essential for optimizing health outcomes and ASCVD prevention.