Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Department of Corporate Finance, University of Economics, Prague, Czech Republic.
Am J Prev Med. 2018 Dec;55(6):896-907. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.06.016. Epub 2018 Oct 16.
Although screening recommendations for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen testing often include shared decision making, the effect of patient decision aids on patients' intention and uptake is unclear. This study aimed to review the effect of decision aids on men's screening intention, screening utilization, and the congruence between intentions and uptake.
Data sources were searched through April 6, 2018, and included MEDLINE, Scopus, CENTRAL, CT.gov, Cochrane report, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, and reference lists. This study included RCTs and observational studies of decision aids that measured prostate screening intention or behavior. The analysis was completed in April 2018.
Eighteen studies (13 RCTs, four before-after studies, and one non-RCT) reported data on screening intention for ≅8,400 men and screening uptake for 2,385 men. Compared with usual care, the use of decision aids in any format results in fewer men (aged ≥40 years) planning to undergo prostate-specific antigen testing (risk ratio=0.88, 95% CI=0.81, 0.95, p=0.006, I=66%, p<0.001, n=8). Many men did not follow their screening intentions during the first year after using a decision aid; however, most men who were planning to undergo screening did so (probability that men who wanted to be screened would receive screening was 95%).
Integration of decision aids in clinical practice may result in a decrease in the number of men who elect prostate-specific antigen testing, which may in turn reduce screening uptake. To ensure high congruence between intention and screening utilization, providers should not delay the shared decision-making discussion after patients use a decision aid.
尽管使用前列腺特异性抗原检测进行前列腺癌筛查的建议通常包括共同决策,但患者决策辅助工具对患者意向和接受程度的影响尚不清楚。本研究旨在综述决策辅助工具对男性筛查意向、筛查利用以及意向与接受程度之间一致性的影响。
数据检索截至 2018 年 4 月 6 日,包括 MEDLINE、Scopus、CENTRAL、CT.gov、Cochrane 报告、PsycARTICLES、PsycINFO 和参考文献列表。本研究纳入了评估前列腺筛查意向或行为的决策辅助工具的 RCT 和观察性研究。分析于 2018 年 4 月完成。
18 项研究(13 项 RCT、4 项前后对照研究和 1 项非 RCT)报告了约 8400 名男性的筛查意向数据和 2385 名男性的筛查接受度数据。与常规护理相比,任何形式的决策辅助工具的使用都会使较少的男性(年龄≥40 岁)计划进行前列腺特异性抗原检测(风险比=0.88,95%CI=0.81,0.95,p=0.006,I²=66%,p<0.001,n=8)。许多男性在使用决策辅助工具后的第一年并未按其筛查意向进行筛查;然而,大多数计划进行筛查的男性确实进行了筛查(计划接受筛查的男性中有 95%的人确实接受了筛查)。
将决策辅助工具整合到临床实践中可能会减少选择进行前列腺特异性抗原检测的男性数量,从而降低筛查接受度。为确保意向与筛查利用之间的高度一致性,提供者不应在患者使用决策辅助工具后延迟共同决策讨论。