Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Psychological aspects of active surveillance

  • Topic Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

The objective of this paper was to discuss the psychological impact of active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) and the resulting implications of psychological wellbeing for treatment decision making and acceptance of AS protocols.

Method

Qualitative and quantitative research in the area of anxiety, depression, and distress is discussed drawing from PCa literature as well other health conditions from which parallels can be drawn.

Results

Attention is given to the role of the clinician in treatment decision making, including the value of information provision, and perceived trust in the AS as a management approach.

Conclusion

Given that research is conflicted regarding the psychological impact of AS for PCa, it is suggested that focus shifts away from debate of the ‘true’ experience of AS rather researchers and clinicians should seek to identify the factors associated with positive and negative psychological response to diagnosis and AS to improve psychological and physical outcomes. Recommendations for clinical practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. National Institute for Clinical Excellence N: Prostate cancer: diagnosis and management NICE guideline [NG131]. . https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng131 (2019). Accessed 24 Sept 2020

  2. National Institute for Clinical Excellence N: Prostate cancer: diagnosis and treatment (CG175). http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG175 (2014). Accessed 24 Sept 2020

  3. Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou JA, Bray F, Jemal A (2020) Recent global patterns in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol 77(1):38–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane J, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P et al (2016) 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1415–1424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McIntosh M, Opozda MJ, Evans H, Finlay A, Galvão DA, Chambers SK et al (2019) A systematic review of the unmet supportive care needs of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Psycho-oncology 28(12):2307–2322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bailey DE Jr, Wallace M, Mishel MH (2007) Watching, waiting and uncertainty in prostate cancer. J Clin Nurs 16(4):734–741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hedestig O, Sandman P-O, Widmark A (2003) Living with untreated localized prostate cancer: a qualitative analysis of patient narratives. Cancer Nurs 26(1):55–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kazer MW (2012) Conversion from active surveillance to active treatment for prostate cancer: a qualitative analysis. J Nurs Educ Pract 2(2):80

    Google Scholar 

  9. Partridge A, Adloff K, Blood E, Dees EC, Kaelin C, Golshan M et al (2008) Risk perceptions and psychosocial outcomes of women with ductal carcinoma in situ: longitudinal results from a cohort study. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(4):243–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. D’Agostino TA, Shuk E, Maloney EK, Zeuren R, Tuttle RM, Bylund CL (2018) Treatment decision making in early-stage papillary thyroid cancer. Psycho-oncology 27(1):61–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. McShane CM, Murphy B, Lim KH, Anderson LA (2018) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance as viewed by haematology healthcare professionals. Eur J Haematol 100(1):20–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ruane-McAteer E, Porter S, O’Sullivan JM, Santin O, Prue G (2017) Active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate cancer: Is there a greater psychological impact than previously thought? A systematic, mixed studies literature review. Psycho-oncology 26(10):1411–1421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kinsella N, Stattin P, Cahill D, Brown C, Bill-Axelson A, Bratt O et al (2018) Factors influencing men’s choice of and adherence to active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: a mixed-method systematic review. Eur Urol 74(3):261–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. van den Bergh RC, Essink-Bot ML, Roobol MJ, Wolters T, Schröder FH, Bangma CH et al (2009) Anxiety and distress during active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Cancer Interdiscip Int J Am Cancer Soc 115(17):3868–3878

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chapple A, Ziebland S (2002) Prostate cancer: embodied experience and perceptions of masculinity. Soc Health Illn 24(6):820–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Davison BJ, Breckon E (2012) Factors influencing treatment decision making and information preferences of prostate cancer patients on active surveillance. Patient Educ Couns 87(3):369–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ruane-McAteer E, Porter S, O’Sullivan J, Dempster M, Prue G (2019) Investigating the psychological impact of active surveillance or active treatment in newly diagnosed favorable-risk prostate cancer patients: a 9-month longitudinal study. Psycho-oncology 28(8):1743–1752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Venderbos L, Roobol M, Bangma C, Korfage I (2015) Five-year follow-up after active surveillance or curative treatment: preliminary quality of life outcomes of men with prostate cancer. Qual Life Res springer van godewijckstraat 30, 3311 gz dordrecht, netherlands. p. 30

  19. Couper JW, Love AW, Dunai JV, Duchesne GM, Bloch S, Costello AJ et al (2009) The psychological aftermath of prostate cancer treatment choices: a comparison of depression, anxiety and quality of life outcomes over the 12 months following diagnosis. Med J Aust 190:S86–S89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Parker PA, Davis JW, Latini DM, Baum G, Wang X, Ward JF et al (2016) Relationship between illness uncertainty, anxiety, fear of progression and quality of life in men with favourable-risk prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance. BJU Int 117(3):469–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Seaman AT, Taylor KL, Davis K, Nepple KG, Lynch JH, Oberle AD et al (2019) Why men with a low-risk prostate cancer select and stay on active surveillance: a qualitative study. PLoS ONE 14(11):e0225134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ruane-McAteer E, Porter S, O’Sullivan JM, Prue G (2018) A cognitive-emotional see-saw: Men’s experiences of undergoing active surveillance for prostate cancer. Psycho-oncology: Wiley 111 River st, Hoboken 07030–5774, NJ USA. p. 170

  23. Hoffman RM, Couper MP, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Levin CA, McNaughton-Collins M, Helitzer DL et al (2009) Prostate cancer screening decisions: results from the National Survey of Medical Decisions (DECISIONS study). Arch Intern Med 169(17):1611–1618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Donovan JL (2012) Presenting treatment options to men with clinically localized prostate cancer: the acceptability of active surveillance/monitoring. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2012(45):191–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fowler FJ Jr, Collins MM, Albertsen PC, Zietman A, Elliott DB, Barry MJ (2000) Comparison of recommendations by urologists and radiation oncologists for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 283(24):3217–3222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hanna C, Mason M, Donovan J, Barber J (2002) Clinical oncologists favour radical radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a questionnaire survey. BJU Int 90(6):558–560

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Mills N, Donovan JL, Wade J, Hamdy FC, Neal DE, Lane JA (2011) Exploring treatment preferences facilitated recruitment to randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol 64(10):1127–1136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wade J, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Neal DE, Hamdy FC (2009) It’s not just what you say, it’s also how you say it: opening the ‘black box’of informed consent appointments in randomised controlled trials. Soc Sci Med 68(11):2018–2028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ruane-McAteer E (2017) Exploring the psychological impact of active surveillance for favourable-risk prostate cancer: a mixed methods study. Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Eimear Ruane-McAteer

  2. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland

    Gillian Prue

Authors
  1. Eimear Ruane-McAteer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gillian Prue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ER-M and GP contributed equally to protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eimear Ruane-McAteer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflicts of interests/competing interests to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ruane-McAteer, E., Prue, G. Psychological aspects of active surveillance. World J Urol 40, 9–13 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03553-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03553-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation