Shared decision making for prostate cancer screening: the results of a combined analysis of two practice-based randomized controlled trials

BackgroundProfessional societies recommend shared decision making (SDM) for prostate cancer screening, however, most efforts have promoted informed rather than shared decision making. The objective of this study is to 1) examine the effects of a prostate cancer screening intervention to promote SDM and 2) determine whether framing prostate information in the context of other clearly beneficial men’s health services affects decisions.MethodsWe conducted two separate randomized controlled trials of the same prostate cancer intervention (with or without additional information on more clearly beneficial men’s health services). For each trial, we enrolled a convenience sample of 2 internal medicine practices, and their interested physicians and male patients with no prior history of prostate cancer (for a total of 4 practices, 28 physicians, and 128 men across trials). Within each practice site, we randomized men to either 1) a video-based decision aid and researcher-led coaching session or 2) a highway safety video. Physicians at each site received a 1-hour educational session on prostate cancer and SDM. To assess intervention effects, we measured key components of SDM, intent to be screened, and actual screening. After finding that results did not vary by trial, we combined data across sites, adjusting for the random effects of both practice and physician.ResultsCompared to an attention control, our prostate cancer screening intervention increased men’s perceptions that screening is a decision (absolute difference +41%; 95% CI 25 to 57%) and men’s knowledge about prostate cancer screening (absolute difference +34%; 95% CI 19% to 50%), but had no effect on men’s self-reported participation in shared decisions or their participation at their preferred level. Overall, the intervention decreased screening intent (absolute difference −34%; 95% CI −50% to −18%) and actual screening rates (absolute difference −22%; 95% CI −38 to −7%) with no difference in effect by frame.ConclusionsSDM interventions can increase men’s knowledge, alter their perceptions of prostate cancer screening, and reduce actual screening. However, they may not guarantee an increase in shared decisions.Trial registration#NCT00630188

[1]  T. Wilt,et al.  Screening for prostate cancer. , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[2]  D. Kiesler,et al.  Optimal matches of patient preferences for information, decision-making and interpersonal behavior: evidence, models and interventions. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[3]  J. Sloan,et al.  Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play? , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[4]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence? , 2003, JAMA.

[5]  V. Entwistle,et al.  Assessing patients' participation and quality of decision-making: insights from a study of routine practice in diverse settings. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.

[6]  V. Moyer,et al.  Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  Jennifer Kryworuchko,et al.  Decision coaching to prepare patients for making health decisions - a systematic review of decision coaching in trials of patient decision aids , 2011 .

[8]  C. Mulrow,et al.  Use of lipid lowering drugs for primary prevention of coronary heart disease: meta-analysis of randomised trials , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  U. P. S. T. Force,et al.  Screening for Prostate Cancer: Recommendation and Rationale , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  G. Elwyn,et al.  Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement , 2003, Quality & safety in health care.

[11]  Lenora E. Johnson,et al.  Educating African American Men about the Prostate Cancer Screening Dilemma: A Randomized Intervention , 2006, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[12]  Kathleen N Lohr,et al.  Screening for Prostate Cancer: An Update of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[13]  P Kinnersley,et al.  Measuring the involvement of patients in shared decision-making: a systematic review of instruments. , 2001, Patient education and counseling.

[14]  Amiram Gafni,et al.  Shared Decision Making in the Medical Encounter: Are We All Talking about the Same Thing? , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  Stacey L. Sheridan,et al.  Translating medical evidence to promote informed health care decisions. , 2011, Health services research.

[16]  Nina Singh,et al.  Aspirin for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events: A Summary of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[17]  Jiang He,et al.  Trends in ATP-III-defined high blood cholesterol prevalence, awareness, treatment and control among U.S. adults. , 2007, Annals of epidemiology.

[18]  GraspingEric Paulospaulos,et al.  Trends in the , 2003 .

[19]  A. D'Amico,et al.  American Cancer Society Guideline for the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Update 2010 , 2010, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[20]  J. Cutler,et al.  Trends in Hypertension Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control Rates in United States Adults Between 1988–1994 and 1999–2004 , 2008, Hypertension.

[21]  Stacey L Sheridan,et al.  Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention. a suggested approach from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. , 2004, American journal of preventive medicine.

[22]  N. Rigotti,et al.  The treatment of smoking by US physicians during ambulatory visits: 1994 2003. , 2007, American journal of public health.

[23]  Stacey L. Sheridan,et al.  Screening for high blood pressure: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. , 2003, American journal of preventive medicine.

[24]  J. Ward,et al.  Does 'peer coaching' increase GP capacity to promote informed decision making about PSA screening? A cluster randomised trial. , 2005, Family practice.

[25]  C. Lawton,et al.  Screening and Prostate-Cancer Mortality in a Randomized European Study , 2010 .

[26]  Gregory Makoul,et al.  An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[27]  David Chia,et al.  Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  Robert J Volk,et al.  Trials of decision aids for prostate cancer screening: a systematic review. , 2007, American journal of preventive medicine.

[29]  M. Härter,et al.  Measuring (shared) decision-making--a review of psychometric instruments. , 2007, Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung und Qualitatssicherung.

[30]  T. Wilt,et al.  Measuring patient knowledge of the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.

[31]  E. Norton,et al.  What's the Risk? A simple approach for estimating adjusted risk measures from nonlinear models including logistic regression. , 2009, Health services research.

[32]  T. Wilt,et al.  Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors , 2004, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[33]  Mark J Sculpher,et al.  Effects of decision aids for menorrhagia on treatment choices, health outcomes, and costs: a randomized controlled trial. , 2002, JAMA.