Suppr超能文献

泌尿外科医生和全科医生在机会性前列腺癌筛查方面的知识、信念及实践:一项遵循PRISMA标准的系统评价

Urologists' and general practitioners' knowledge, beliefs and practice relevant for opportunistic prostate cancer screening: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review.

作者信息

Estevan-Ortega María, de la Encarnación Castellano Cristina, Mendiola-López Alberto, Parker Lucy A, Caballero-Romeu Juan Pablo, Lumbreras Blanca

机构信息

Pharmacy Faculty, University Miguel Hernández de Elche, Alicante, Spain.

Department of Urology, University General Hospital of Alicante, Alicante, Spain.

出版信息

Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Feb 16;11:1283654. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1283654. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recent guidelines on opportunistic prostate cancer screening conclude that the decision to screen with prostate-specific antigen should be made by each patient individually together with the clinician. However, there is evidence of a lack of clinicians' awareness of prostate cancer screening. This study sought to assess the recent evidence of clinicians' knowledge, beliefs, and practice regarding opportunistic prostate cancer screening comparing urologists and generals practitioners.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in 3 online databases: MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE (from January 1, 2015, to January 9th, 2023). Studies that explored clinicians' knowledge, beliefs, and practices regarding opportunistic prostate cancer screening were included. Studies were assessed for quality reporting according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria: ten studies included primary care health professionals, three studies included urologists, and one study included both. Studies involving general practitioners showed a generally low level of awareness of the recommended uses of the test, and urologists showed a greater knowledge of clinical practice guidelines. General practitioners' opinion of prostate-specific antigen was generally unfavourable in contrast to urologists' who were more likely to be proactive in ordering the test. Less than half of the included studies evaluated shared-decision making in practice and 50% of clinicians surveyed implemented it.

CONCLUSION

General practitioners had less knowledge of prostate cancer risk factors and clinical practice guidelines in the use of PSA than urologists, which makes them less likely to follow available recommendations. A need to carry out education interventions with trusted resources based on the available evidence and the current guidelines was identified.

摘要

背景

近期关于机会性前列腺癌筛查的指南指出,是否采用前列腺特异性抗原进行筛查的决定应由每位患者与临床医生共同做出。然而,有证据表明临床医生对前列腺癌筛查缺乏认知。本研究旨在评估近期关于临床医生对机会性前列腺癌筛查的知识、信念和实践的证据,比较泌尿外科医生和全科医生。

方法

在3个在线数据库(MEDLINE、科学网和EMBASE,检索时间为2015年1月1日至2023年1月9日)中进行系统检索。纳入探索临床医生对机会性前列腺癌筛查的知识、信念和实践的研究。根据加强流行病学观察性研究报告指南对研究进行质量报告评估。

结果

共有14项研究符合纳入标准:10项研究纳入了基层医疗保健专业人员,3项研究纳入了泌尿外科医生,1项研究同时纳入了两者。涉及全科医生的研究显示,对该检测推荐用途的认知水平普遍较低,而泌尿外科医生对临床实践指南的了解更多。与更倾向于积极开具该检测医嘱的泌尿外科医生相比,全科医生对前列腺特异性抗原的看法普遍不太乐观。纳入研究中不到一半评估了实践中的共同决策,且接受调查的临床医生中有50%实施了共同决策。

结论

与泌尿外科医生相比,全科医生对前列腺癌风险因素及前列腺特异性抗原使用的临床实践指南了解较少,这使得他们不太可能遵循现有建议。基于现有证据和当前指南,确定需要利用可靠资源开展教育干预。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0afd/10905619/4d898eb0206e/fmed-11-1283654-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验