| 1. |
- Carlsson, Sigrid, 1982, et al.
(author)
-
A Provider-Facing Decision Support Tool for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Pilot Study
- 2024
-
In: APPLIED CLINICAL INFORMATICS. - 1869-0327. ; 15:02, s. 274-281
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives Our objective was to pilot test an electronic health record-embedded decision support tool to facilitate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening discussions in the primary care setting. Methods We pilot-tested a novel decision support tool that was used by 10 primary care physicians (PCPs) for 6 months, followed by a survey. The tool comprised (1) a risk-stratified algorithm, (2) a tool for facilitating shared decision-making (Simple Schema), (3) three best practice advisories (BPAs: <45, 45-75, and >75 years), and (4) a health maintenance module for scheduling automated reminders about PSA rescreening. Results All PCPs found the tool feasible, acceptable, and clear to use. Eight out of ten PCPs reported that the tool made PSA screening conversations somewhat or much easier. Before using the tool, 70% of PCPs felt confident in their ability to discuss PSA screening with their patient, and this improved to 100% after the tool was used by PCPs for 6 months. PCPs found the BPAs for eligible (45-75 years) and older men (>75 years) more useful than the BPA for younger men (<45 years). Among the 10 PCPs, 60% found the Simple Schema to be very useful, and 50% found the health maintenance module to be extremely or very useful. Most PCPs reported the components of the tool to be at least somewhat useful, with 10% finding them to be very burdensome. Conclusion We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the tool, which is notable given the marked low acceptance of existing tools. All PCPs reported that they would consider continuing to use the tool in their clinic and were likely or very likely to recommend the tool to a colleague.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carlsson, Sigrid, 1982, et al.
(author)
-
Provider Perceptions of an Electronic Health Record Prostate Cancer Screening Tool
- 2024
-
In: APPLIED CLINICAL INFORMATICS. - 1869-0327. ; 15:02, s. 282-294
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives We conducted a focus group to assess the attitudes of primary care physicians (PCPs) toward prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-screening algorithms, perceptions of using decision support tools, and features that would make such tools feasible to implement. Methods A multidisciplinary team (primary care, urology, behavioral sciences, bioinformatics) developed the decision support tool that was presented to a focus group of 10 PCPs who also filled out a survey. Notes and audio-recorded transcripts were analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis. Results The survey showed that PCPs followed different guidelines. In total, 7/10 PCPs agreed that engaging in shared decision-making about PSA screening was burdensome. The majority (9/10) had never used a decision aid for PSA screening. Although 70% of PCPs felt confident about their ability to discuss PSA screening, 90% still felt a need for a provider-facing platform to assist in these discussions. Three major themes emerged: (1) confirmatory reactions regarding the importance, innovation, and unmet need for a decision support tool embedded in the electronic health record; (2) issues around implementation and application of the tool in clinic workflow and PCPs' own clinical bias; and (3) attitudes/reflections regarding discrepant recommendations from various guideline groups that cause confusion. Conclusion There was overwhelmingly positive support for the need for a provider-facing decision support tool to assist with PSA-screening decisions in the primary care setting. PCPs appreciated that the tool would allow flexibility for clinical judgment and documentation of shared decision-making. Incorporation of suggestions from this focus group into a second version of the tool will be used in subsequent pilot testing.
|
|
| 3. |
- Gaffney, Christopher D., et al.
(author)
-
A brief mind-body intervention to reduce pain and anxiety during prostate needle biopsy: a clinically integrated randomized controlled trial with 2-staged consent
- 2023
-
In: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. - 1078-1439 .- 1873-2496. ; 41:12
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: Many patients experience pain, anxiety, and discomfort with prostate biopsy, which may discourage enrollment in active surveillance programs or follow-up biopsy. Guided meditation can significantly reduce pain and anxiety during percutaneous biopsy. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief mind-body intervention on patient-reported outcomes after prostate biopsy. Methods and materials: We performed a clinically-integrated randomized controlled trial of a brief mind-body intervention during biopsy compared to usual care at a single tertiary care center from 2018 to 2022. All patients offered transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in the clinic with local anesthesia were eligible for enrollment. This clinically integrated trial was conducted simultaneously with a randomized controlled trial of 1-stage and 2-stage consent. The primary outcome was patient-reported pain, anxiety, discomfort, and tolerability on a visual-analog scale (0–10). A 15% improvement was prespecified as clinically relevant. We compared the proportion of men in each arm reporting a severe score (7–10) on any of the 4 scales using Fisher's exact test and then compared means for each scale separately using ANCOVA with randomization stratum (first vs. prior biopsy) as a covariate. Results: Of 263 eligible patients, 238 enrolled (119 per arm). One hundred seventy-two (72%) enrolled with 2-stage consent. A total of 37/94 (39%) and 38/102 (37%) patients randomized to usual care and intervention, respectively, reported severe scores in any of the 4 domains, a difference of 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] -13, 17%, P = 0.8). There was no evidence of a difference in mean postbiopsy anxiety (P = 0.3), discomfort (P = 0.09), pain (P = 0.4) or tolerability scores (P = 0.2). Conclusions: A clinically meaningful benefit for this brief mind-body intervention during prostate biopsy is unlikely. Robust patient enrollment is feasible using 2-stage consent.
|
|
| 4. |
- Rasmussen, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Independent validation of a pre-specified four-kallikrein marker model for prediction of adverse pathology and biochemical recurrence
- 2022
-
In: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 126:7, s. 1004-1009
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Accurate markers for prostate cancer (PC) risk stratification could aid decision-making for initial management strategies. The 4Kscore has an undefined role in predicting outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: We included 1476 patients with 4Kscore measured prior to RP at two institutions. The 4Kscore was assessed for prediction of adverse pathology at RP and biochemical recurrence (BCR) relative to a clinical model. We pre-specified that all analyses would be assessed in biopsy Grade Group 1 (GG1) or 2 (GG2) PC patients, separately. Results: The 4Kscore increased discrimination for adverse pathology in all patients (delta area under the receiver operative curve (AUC) 0.009, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.002, 0.016; clinical model AUC 0.767), driven by GG1 (delta AUC 0.040, 95% CI 0.006, 0.073) rather than GG2 patients (delta AUC 0.005, 95% CI −0.012, 0.021). Adding 4Kscore improved prediction of BCR in all patients (delta C-index 0.014, 95% CI 0.007, 0.021; preop-BCR nomogram C-index 0.738), again with larger changes in GG1 than in GG2. Conclusions: This study validates prior investigations on the use of 4Kscore in men with biopsy-confirmed PC. Men with GG1 PC and a high 4Kscore may benefit from additional testing to guide treatment selection. Further research is warranted regarding the value of the 4Kscore in men with biopsy GG2 PC.
|
|
