The objective of our study was to describe decision making by men and their partners regarding active surveillance (AS) or treatment for early-stage, localized prostate cancer. Fifteen couples were recruited from a cancer center multispecialty clinic, which gave full information about all options, including AS. Data were collected via individual, semi-structured telephone interviews.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFActive surveillance is increasingly recognized as a reasonable option for men with low-risk, localized prostate cancer, yet few men who might benefit from conservative management receive it. The authors examined the acceptability of normative messages about active surveillance as a management option for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Men with a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer who were recruited through prostate cancer support organizations completed a web-based survey (N = 331).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjective: Few decision aids emphasize active surveillance (AS) for localized prostate cancer. Concept mapping was used to produce a conceptual framework incorporating AS and treatment.
Methods: Fifty-four statements about what men need to make a decision for localized prostate cancer were derived from focus groups with African American, Latino and white men previously screened for prostate cancer and partners (n = 80).
Background: Growing recognition that active surveillance (AS) is a reasonable management option for many men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer led us to describe patients' conceptualizations of AS and reasons for their treatment decisions.
Methods: Men were patients of a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic at a large tertiary cancer center where patients are routinely briefed on treatment options, including AS. We conducted a thematic analysis of interviews with 15 men who had chosen AS and 15 men who received radiation or surgery.
Objective: We assessed the short-term effects of a community-based intervention for Hispanic men to encourage informed decision making (IDM) about prostate cancer screening with prostate specific antigen (PSA).
Methods: All senior social and housing centers in El Paso, TX were randomized to intervention, a group-based Spanish language educational program facilitated by promotores (12 centers; 161 men) [I's], or to control, promotores-facilitated diabetes video and discussion (13 centers; 160 men) [C's].
Results: Participants had low levels of schooling and baseline knowledge; 44% reported previous PSA testing.
Objectives: We obtained population estimates of the prevalence of lack of diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) result and assessed the role of sociodemographic, access, and risk perception factors on follow-up of abnormal tests.
Methods: We used data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey cancer control supplement. For 3,310 men aged 40 or older with a PSA test, 463 men reported an abnormal PSA test.
Objective. This study examines the association of social ties and cancer screening. Method.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFMatern Child Health J
May 2009
Objectives: Among childbearing Latinas, higher acculturation has been found to be significantly associated with increased risk for mental health problems, although these findings have been inconsistent. The aims of this study are to assess and compare the prevalence of elevated depressive symptoms among pregnant and postpartum U.S.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFProfessional guidelines suggest that men should learn about risks and benefits of screening to make informed decisions consistent with their preferences. We used concept mapping to investigate views of informed decision making (IDM) of minority men. Statements about what men need for IDM about prostate cancer screening were sorted by similarity and rated for importance by 16 Hispanic and 15 African-American men.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: This study is an assessment of racial and ethnic differences in the awareness and use of prostate specific antigen tests.
Materials And Methods: This is a secondary analysis of the 2000 National Health Interview Survey cancer control supplement. The subsample was 4,717 men 50 years old or older without prior prostate cancer.
Purpose: Informed decision making is recommended for prostate cancer screening. I wanted to examine demographic and screening-related factors associated with men's discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests with their physicians.
Methods: I used data from 2,184 men aged 50 years and older who reported a screening prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test in the 2000 National Health Interview Survey cancer control supplement.
Objective: The demanding behavioral changes for weight control to manage diabetes might contribute to lower quality of life (QOL). This research examines whether the demands of diet and exercise contribute to lower QOL among persons with diabetes.
Methods: Data were from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), which measures days in the last month for poor physical health, poor mental health, limited activity, pain, depression, stress, poor sleep, and high energy, as well as weight control efforts.
Objectives: Practice guidelines support informed or shared decision-making about prostate cancer screening. To compare beliefs across three racial/ethnic categories concerning prostate cancer etiology and risk, screening routines, and shared decision-making, we conducted 12 focus groups.
Methods: Participants were recruited in primary care settings and included 33 African Americans, 35 Hispanics, and 22 non-Hispanic Whites.
Patient Educ Couns
March 2003
Professional guidelines call for physicians to provide patients with information to permit informed decision making. We conducted focus groups to obtain reactions to numerical information about events and outcomes related to prostate cancer screening (prevalence, natural history, accuracy of screening, and treatment outcomes). The focus groups were used to help develop a balance sheet, a decision aid that explicitly compares likelihood and value of outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF