A community-based randomised controlled trial of three different educational resources for men about prostate cancer screening

被引:78
作者
Gattellari, M
Ward, JE
机构
[1] Univ New S Wales, Sch Publ Hlth & Community Med, Dept Gen Practice, Liverpool, NSW 1871, Australia
[2] S Western Sydney Area Hlth Serv, Div Populat Hlth, Liverpool, NSW 1871, Australia
关键词
informed decision-making; PSA screening; decision-aids; randomised controlled trial;
D O I
10.1016/j.pec.2004.05.011
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Randomised evaluations of resources to facilitate informed decisions about prostate cancer screening are rarely conducted. In this study, 421 men recruited from the community were randomly allocated to receive a leaflet (n = 140) or one of two resources meeting criteria for a decision-aid: a video (n = 141) or an evidence-based booklet, developed by the authors (n = 140). Men in all three groups demonstrated significant increases in knowledge scores from pre to post-test. Scores were significantly higher at post-test amongst those who had received our evidence-based booklet compared with men who received the leaflet or video (P < 0.001). Scores were significantly modified by men's preferences for decisional control (P = 0.002). Decisional conflict was significantly lower amongst men receiving the evidence-based booklet (P = 0.038). Men receiving the evidence-based booklet also were less likely to accept a recommendation by a GP to undergo prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) screening (P = 0.003). Men require detailed information about the pros and cons of PSA screening in order to make an informed decision. Resources are not equivalent in achieving these outcomes. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:168 / 182
页数:15
相关论文
共 40 条
[21]   The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials [J].
Moher, D ;
Schulz, KF ;
Altman, DG .
LANCET, 2001, 357 (9263) :1191-1194
[22]  
*NOR JM SPSS INC, 1999, SPSS WIND BAS SYST U
[23]   VALIDATION OF A DECISIONAL CONFLICT SCALE [J].
OCONNOR, AM .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1995, 15 (01) :25-30
[24]  
OCONNOR AM, 2003, DECISION AIDS PEOPLE
[25]   Contentious screening decisions - Does the choice matter [J].
Pauker, SG ;
Kassirer, JP .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1997, 336 (17) :1243-1244
[26]   Design of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial [J].
Prorok, PC ;
Andriole, GL ;
Bresalier, RS ;
Buys, SS ;
Chia, D ;
Crawford, ED ;
Fogel, R ;
Gelmann, EP ;
Gilbert, F ;
Hasson, MA ;
Hayes, RB ;
Johnson, CC ;
Mandel, JS ;
Oberman, A ;
O'Brien, B ;
Oken, MM ;
Rafla, S ;
Reding, D ;
Rutt, W ;
Weissfeld, JL ;
Yokochi, L ;
Gohagan, JK .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 2000, 21 (06) :273S-309S
[27]   Honesty about new screening programmes is best policy [J].
Raffle, AE .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7238) :872-+
[28]   Confirmatory analysis of opinions regarding the pros and cons of mammography [J].
Rakowski, W ;
Andersen, MR ;
Stoddard, AM ;
Urban, N ;
Rimer, BK ;
Lane, DS ;
Fox, SA ;
Costanza, ME .
HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 16 (05) :433-441
[29]   UNDERSTANDING PATIENTS DECISIONS - COGNITIVE AND EMOTIONAL PERSPECTIVES [J].
REDELMEIER, DA ;
ROZIN, P ;
KAHNEMAN, D .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (01) :72-76
[30]   Does the frame affect the picture? A study into how attitudes to screening for cancer are affected by the way benefits are expressed [J].
Sarfati, D ;
Howden-Chapman, P ;
Woodward, A ;
Salmond, C .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 1998, 5 (03) :137-140