A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38168921/ below:

Shared decision-making before prostate cancer screening decisions

Review

. 2024 Jun;21(6):329-338. doi: 10.1038/s41585-023-00840-0. Epub 2024 Jan 2. Shared decision-making before prostate cancer screening decisions

Affiliations

Affiliations

Item in Clipboard

Review

Shared decision-making before prostate cancer screening decisions

Kelly R Pekala et al. Nat Rev Urol. 2024 Jun.

. 2024 Jun;21(6):329-338. doi: 10.1038/s41585-023-00840-0. Epub 2024 Jan 2. Affiliations

Item in Clipboard

Abstract

Decisions around prostate-specific antigen screening require a patient-centred approach, considering the benefits and risks of potential harm. Using shared decision-making (SDM) can improve men's knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. SDM is supported by evidence, but can be difficult to implement in clinical settings. An inclusive definition of SDM was used in order to determine the prevalence of SDM in prostate cancer screening decisions. Despite consensus among guidelines endorsing SDM practice, the prevalence of SDM occurring before the decision to undergo or forgo prostate-specific antigen testing varied between 11% and 98%, and was higher in studies in which SDM was self-reported by physicians than in patient-reported recollections and observed practices. The influence of trust and continuity in physician-patient relationships were identified as facilitators of SDM, whereas common barriers included limited appointment times and poor health literacy. Decision aids, which can help physicians to convey health information within a limited time frame and give patients increased autonomy over decisions, are underused and were not shown to clearly influence whether SDM occurs. Future studies should focus on methods to facilitate the use of SDM in clinical settings.

© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests:

S.V.C. has received travel reimbursement and honorarium from Ipsen and has served on an advisory board for Prostatype Genomics. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles Cited by References
    1. Charles C, Gafni A & Whelan T Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 44, 681–692, doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00221-3 (1997). - DOI - PubMed
    1. Makarov DV et al. AUA white paper on implementation of shared decision making into urological practice. Urology Practice 3, 355–363, doi:10.1016/j.urpr.2015.10.006 (2016). - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chan EC & Sulmasy DP What should men know about prostate-specific antigen screening before giving informed consent? Am J Med 105, 266–274, doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(98)00257-5 (1998). - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barry MJ & Edgman-Levitan S Shared decision making--pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 366, 780–781, doi:10.1056/NEJMp1109283 (2012). - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sung H et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71, 209–249, doi:10.3322/caac.21660 (2021). - DOI - PubMed

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3