OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Journal of the National Medical Association
Aug, 2005;97 (8): 1143-54.

Preparing African-American men in community primary care practices to decide whether or not to have prostate cancer screening.

Ronald E Myers, Constantine Daskalakis, James Cocroft, Elisabeth J S Kunkel, Ernestine Delmoor, Matthew Liberatore, Robert L Nydick, Earl R Brown, Roy N Gay, Thomas Powell, Roberta Lee Powell
Author Information
  1. Ronald E Myers: Division of Genetic and Preventive Medicine Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA. ron.myers@mail.tju.edu
PMID: 16173330

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study was a randomized trial to test the impact of an informed decision-making intervention on prostate cancer screening use.
METHODS: The study population included 242 African-American men from three primary care practices who were 40-69 years of age and had no history of prostate cancer. Participants completed a baseline survey questionnaire and were randomly assigned either to a Standard Intervention (SI) group (N=121) or an Enhanced Intervention (EI) group (N=121). An informational booklet was mailed to both groups. EI group men were also offered a screening decision education session. Two outcomes were considered: (1) complete screening (i.e., having a digital rectal exam (DRE) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing), and (2) complete or partial screening (i.e., having a PSA test with or without DRE). An endpoint chart audit was performed six months after initial intervention contact. The data were analyzed via exact logistic regression.
RESULTS: Overall, screening use was low among study participants. EI group men had a screening frequency two times greater than that of SI group men, but the difference was not statistically significant: 8% vs. 4 % (OR = 1.94) fo rcomplete screening, and 19% vs. 10% (OR = 2.08) for complete or partial screening. Multivariable analyses showed that being in the EI group and primary care practice were significant predictors of complete or partial screening (OR = 3.9 and OR = 5.64, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Prostate cancer screening use may be influenced by exposure to decision education and the influence of screening-related primary care practice factors.

References

  1. Health Expect. 2000 Mar;3(1):37-45 [PMID: 11281910]
  2. CA Cancer J Clin. 1993 Jan-Feb;43(1):42-6 [PMID: 8422604]
  3. Health Serv Res. 1986 Feb;20(6 Pt 2):897-932 [PMID: 3949541]
  4. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Jun;16(6):391-8 [PMID: 11422636]
  5. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005 Jan-Feb;55(1):10-30 [PMID: 15661684]
  6. Prev Med. 1994 Mar;23(2):142-51 [PMID: 8047519]
  7. Am J Prev Med. 2004 Jan;26(1):56-66 [PMID: 14700714]
  8. Health Expect. 2001 Jun;4(2):81-6 [PMID: 11359537]
  9. J Urol. 2004 Oct;172(4 Pt 1):1297-301 [PMID: 15371827]
  10. JAMA. 1997 Feb 12;277(6):497-8 [PMID: 9020276]
  11. Ann Intern Med. 2002 Dec 3;137(11):915-6 [PMID: 12458992]
  12. Med Decis Making. 2000 Jan-Mar;20(1):112-27 [PMID: 10638544]
  13. Am J Med. 1997 Oct;103(4):308-14 [PMID: 9382123]
  14. Arch Fam Med. 1999 Jul-Aug;8(4):333-40 [PMID: 10418541]
  15. Patient Educ Couns. 1999 Jul;37(3):255-63 [PMID: 14528551]
  16. J Fam Pract. 2000 May;49(5):418-24 [PMID: 10836772]
  17. Med Decis Making. 2002 Mar-Apr;22(2):125-39 [PMID: 11958495]
  18. Am J Public Health. 2003 May;93(5):779-85 [PMID: 12721144]
  19. Eff Clin Pract. 2001 May-Jun;4(3):112-20 [PMID: 11434074]
  20. Ann Intern Med. 2002 Jan 15;136(2):127-35 [PMID: 11790064]
  21. J Gen Intern Med. 1996 Jun;11(6):342-9 [PMID: 8803740]
  22. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):731-4 [PMID: 10487995]
  23. Med Care. 2003 Jul;41(7):842-52 [PMID: 12835608]
  24. BMJ. 1995 Jul 1;311(6996):4-5 [PMID: 7613327]
  25. Semin Urol Oncol. 2000 Aug;18(3):172-7 [PMID: 10975487]
  26. JAMA. 1995 Jan 11;273(2):129-35 [PMID: 7799493]
  27. Cancer. 1999 Jul 1;86(1):88-104 [PMID: 10391568]
  28. Ann Fam Med. 2003 May-Jun;1(1):22-8 [PMID: 15043176]
  29. Arch Intern Med. 1996 Jun 24;156(12):1262-3 [PMID: 8651833]
  30. J Urol. 1994 Nov;152(5 Pt 2):1905-9 [PMID: 7523735]
  31. JAMA. 1993 Aug 25;270(8):948-54 [PMID: 7688438]
  32. Arch Fam Med. 1993 May;2(5):487-93 [PMID: 8118564]
  33. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1997 Oct;6(10):825-32 [PMID: 9332766]
  34. J Cancer Educ. 1998 Winter;13(4):213-9 [PMID: 9883780]
  35. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Mar 1;43(4):735-43 [PMID: 10098428]
  36. Arch Intern Med. 1996 Jun 24;156(12):1333-6 [PMID: 8651843]

MeSH Term

Adult
Black or African American
Aged
Chi-Square Distribution
Decision Making
Humans
Logistic Models
Male
Mass Screening
Middle Aged
Patient Education as Topic
Primary Health Care
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatic Neoplasms
Surveys and Questionnaires

Chemicals

Prostate-Specific Antigen
Clinical Trial Journal Article Multicenter Study Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0screeninggroupmenprostatecancerprimarycareEIcompleteOR=studyusepartialtestinterventionAfrican-AmericanpracticesInterventionSIN=121decisioneducation1ieDREPSA2vspracticeBACKGROUND:randomizedtrialimpactinformeddecision-makingMETHODS:populationincluded242three40-69yearsagehistoryParticipantscompletedbaselinesurveyquestionnairerandomlyassignedeitherStandardEnhancedinformationalbookletmailedgroupsalsoofferedsessionTwooutcomesconsidered:digitalrectalexamspecificantigentestingwithoutendpointchartauditperformedsixmonthsinitialcontactdataanalyzedviaexactlogisticregressionRESULTS:Overalllowamongparticipantsfrequencytwotimesgreaterdifferencestatisticallysignificant:8%4%94forcomplete19%10%08Multivariableanalysesshowedsignificantpredictors39564respectivelyCONCLUSION:Prostatemayinfluencedexposureinfluencescreening-relatedfactorsPreparingcommunitydecidewhether

Similar Articles

Cited By