Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 22, Issue 7, pp 901–907 | Cite as

Are Physicians Discussing Prostate Cancer Screening with Their Patients and Why or Why Not? A Pilot Study

  • Carmen E. Guerra
  • Samantha E. Jacobs
  • John H. Holmes
  • Judy A. Shea
Original Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer screening (PCS) is controversial. Ideally, patients should understand the risks and benefits of screening before undergoing PSA testing. This study assessed whether primary care physicians routinely discuss PCS and explored the barriers to and facilitators of these discussions.

METHODS

Qualitative pilot study involving in-depth, semistructured interviews with 18 purposively sampled, academic and community-based primary care physicians. Barriers and facilitators of PCS discussions were ascertained using both interviews and chart-stimulated recall—a technique utilizing patient charts to probe recall and provide context to physician decision-making during clinic encounters. Analysis was performed using consensus conferences based on grounded theory techniques.

RESULTS

All 18 participating physicians reported that they generally discussed PCS with patients, though 6 reported sometimes ordering PSA tests without discussion. A PCS discussion occurred in only 16 (36%) of the 44 patient–physician encounters when patients were due for PCS that also met criteria for chart-stimulated recall. Barriers to PCS discussion were patient comorbidity, limited education/health literacy, prior refusal of care, physician forgetfulness, acute-care visits, and lack of time. Facilitators of PCS discussion included patient-requested screening, highly educated patients, family history of prostate cancer, African-American race, visits for routine physicals, review of previous PSA results, extra time during encounters, and reminder systems.

CONCLUSIONS

PCS discussions sometimes do not occur. Important barriers to discussion are inadequate time for health maintenance, physician forgetfulness, and patient characteristics. Future research should explore using educational and decision support interventions to involve more patients in PCS decisions.

KEY WORDS

prostate-specific antigen prostate cancer screening mass screening physician practice patterns physician–patient relations communication barriers informed decision making 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the grant support from the National Institutes of Health Center for Population Health and Health Disparities at the University of Pennsylvania (Public Health Service Grant P50-CA105641) as well as the participating physicians for sharing their valuable perspectives. Dr. Guerra also acknowledges the National Cancer Institute (Public Health Service Grant K01 CA97925) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (fund number 051895) for their additional grant support. The results of this paper were previously presented at the 28th Annual Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, May 12, 2005, New Orleans, LA, USA.

Conflict of Interest

None disclosed.

References

  1. 1.
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(1):43–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    AAFP. Summary of Recommendations for Periodic Health Examination. American Academy of Family Physicians; 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    American Urological Association. Executive Committee Report: Early Detection of Prostate Cancer. Baltimore: American Urological Association; 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003;53(1):27–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: recommendations and rationale. Am Fam Physician. 2003;67(4):787–92.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    American College of Physicians. Clinical guideline, Part III: screening for prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(6):480–4.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan EC, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening? Cancer. 2004;214–28 Sep 1.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coley CM, Barry MJ, Fleming C, Fahs MC, Mulley AG. Early detection of prostate cancer, II: estimating the risks, benefits and costs. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:468–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coley CM, Barry MJ, Fleming C, Mulley AG. Early detection of prostate cancer, I: prior probability and effectiveness of tests. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:394–406.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Han PK, Coates RJ, Uhler RJ, Breen N. Decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening National Health Interview Survey, 2000. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30(5):394–404.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chan EC, Vernon SW, Ahn C, Greisinger A. Do men know that they have had a prostate-specific antigen test? Accuracy of self-reports of testing at 2 sites. Am J Publ Health. 2005;94(8):1336–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jordan TR, Price JH, King KA, Masyk T, Bedell AW. The validity of male patients’ self-reports regarding prostate cancer screening. Prev Med. 1999;28(3):297–303.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Walsh JM, McPhee SJ. A systems model of clinical preventive care: an analysis of factors influencing patient and physician. Health Educ Q. 1992;19:157–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maatsch JL. Predictive Validity of Medical Specialty Examinations. Final report to NCHSR Grant No.: HS02039-04; 1983.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jannett PA, Affleck L. Chart audit and chart stimulated recall as methods of needs assessment in continuing professional health education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 1998;18:163–71.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bridgham RG, Munger B, Reinhart MA, Keefe C, Maatsch JL. The impact of communication between physician and evaluator on assessments of clinical performance. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of Research in Medical Education, 1988. Washington DC: American Association of Medical Colleges; 1988.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huang RR, Maatsch JL, Downing SM, Barker D. Reliability and validity of ratings of physician performance. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of Research in Medical Education, 1984. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Medical Colleges; 1984.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Munger BS, Reinhart MA. Field trial of multiple recertification methods. In: Lloyd JS, Langsley DG, eds. Recertification for Medical Specialists. Evanston, IL: American Board of Medical Specialties; 1987:71–88.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sirovich BE, Schwartz L, Woloshin S. Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States. JAMA. 2003;289:1414–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Prostate Cancer Early Detection. V.1.2006. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/prostate_detection.pdf. Accessed January 6, 2007. In; 2006.
  22. 22.
    Kravitz R, Rolph J, Petersen L. Omission-related malpractice claims and the limits of defensive medicine. Med Care Res Rev. 1997;54(4):456–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hayward R, Asch S, Hogan M, Hofer T, Kerr E. Sins of omission: getting too little medical care may be the greatest threat to patient safety. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(8):686–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kohn LT, Corrigan J, Donaldson M. To Err Is Human: Building A Safer Health System. Washington, DC; 2000.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Austin S, Balas E, Mitchell J, Ewigman B. Effect of physician reminders on preventive care: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. In: Ozbolt JG, ed. Proceedings for 18th Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care, 1994. Washington, DC. Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus; 1994:121–24.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shea S, DuMouchel W, Bahsmonde L. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials to evaluate computer-based clinical reminder systems for preventive care in the ambulatory setting. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3:399–409.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hales B, Pronovost P. The checklist—a tool for error management and performance improvement. J Crit Care. 2006;21(3):231–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Charlton J. Checklists and patient safety. Anaesthesia. 1990;45(6):425–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dunn AS, Shridharani KV, Lou W, Bernstein J, Horowitz CR. Physician–patient discussions of controversial cancer screening tests. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(2):130–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Purvis Cooper C, Merritt TL, Ross LE, John LV, Jorgensen CM. To screen or not to screen, when clinical guidelines disagree: primary care physicians’ use of the PSA test. Prev Med. 2004;38(2):182–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ruffin MT, Gorenflo DW, Woodman B. Predictors of screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and prostatic cancer among community-based primary care practices. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2000;13(1):1–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schoenfeld P. Flexible sigmoidoscopy by paramedical personnel. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1999;28(2):110–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    McPhee SJ, Richard RJ, Solkowitz SN. Performance of cancer screening in a university general internal medicine practice: comparison with the 1980 American Cancer Society Guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 1986;1:275–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Romm FJ, Hulka BS, Kelly LW Jr. Internists’ perceptions and performance in office practice. South Med J. 1980;73(4):405–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wu L, Ashton CM. Chart review. A need for reappraisal. Eval Health Prof. 1997;20:146–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rethans JJ, Martin E, Metsemakers J. To what extend do clinical notes by general practitioners reflect actual medical performance? A study using simulated patients. Br J Gen Pract. 1994;44:153–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dresselhaus TR, Peabody JW, Lee M, Wang MM, Luck J. Measuring compliance with preventive care guidelines: standardized patients, clinical vignettes and the medical record. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;12:782–88.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kogan JR, Reynolds EE, Shea JA. Resident and faculty adherence to common guidelines. Acad Med. 2001;S27–9.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm. A New Health Care System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy of Press; 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carmen E. Guerra
    • 1
  • Samantha E. Jacobs
    • 2
  • John H. Holmes
    • 3
  • Judy A. Shea
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of General Internal MedicineUniversity of Pennsylvania School of MedicinePhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.University of Pennsylvania School of MedicinePhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Center for Clinical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsUniversity of Pennsylvania School of MedicinePhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations