Evaluation of An Online Intervention In Improving General Practitioners' Practice In Prostate Cancer Screening (ProCaSS)

April 17, 2019 updated by: Dr Tun Firzara Abdul Malik, University of Malaya

The incidence of prostate cancer has been rising steadily both globally and in Malaysia. Besides an ageing population, another reason cited to explain the increase, is the corresponding increase in the prostate cancer screening rates, especially using non-invasive tests like the prostate specific antigen (PSA).

General practitioners, being front liners in medicine, play an important role in helping men make an informed decision on prostate cancer screening. In Malaysia, about 50% of GPs would routinely screen asymptomatic men and 95% of them would use PSA as a screening tool. Despite this, the evidence for screening is inconclusive, as evidenced from two major trials on screening [The European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening trial (PLCO)]. Furthermore, clinical practice guidelines globally provide conflicting recommendations on this subject, and none has been published in Malaysia to date.

Therefore, our study aims to determine the effectiveness of an online training module in helping GPs' better understand the controversies surrounding prostate cancer screening, and in so doing, improve their practice of screening. The investigators hypothesise that GPs who are randomised to receive their online module will be less inclined to screen unnecessarily for prostate cancer.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Unknown

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Study design: Randomised controlled trial

Setting: This trial will involve GPs in the Klang Valley, encompassing the Petaling district and Kuala Lumpur.

The healthcare system in Malaysia is divided into public and private sectors. Patients pay a standard minimal fee for public healthcare system whereas the private sector charges patients based on the services provided. The study will be conducted in private GP clinics as PSA testing is readily available compared to the public primary care setting. In public primary care clinics, PSA screening is not offered as part of a routine screening programme.

Sample size:

With 80% power and 5% (two-sided) significance, with an estimated 40% reduction in PSA screening from baseline in the intervention group and 10% in the control group, the number of participants needed for each group is 38 (total 76). Therefore, a total of 96 GPs in the Klang Valley will be recruited for this study, assuming a non-response rate of 20 GPs.

Intervention:

The intervention consists of two phases.

Phase 1 The research team will develop 3 self-administered, online surveys, with the input of family physicians and urologists. The surveys will capture basic demographic information about the participating GPs (but not any identifiable information), and also their overall knowledge and perception towards prostate cancer screening. In addition, all 3 surveys will also contain 5 clinical vignettes that will relate to prostate cancer screening. After reading the vignettes, the GPs will be asked whether or not they would recommend screening for the particular patient in the given scenario; and should they choose to screen, which screening method they would use (PSA, DRE, or both).

GPs will then be randomised to either receive an online training module (intervention) or none (control).

Phase 2:

Upon successful receipt of the GPs' response to the first survey, a second survey will be sent to all the GPs via email. The participants will once again be invited to read and respond to another set of vignettes of similar nature to those in phase 1.

GPs who have been randomised to the intervention arm will also receive a link in the second email that will enable them to download an online training module. The participants will be asked to view the training module prior to answering the second survey.

GPs in the control group will only receive the second survey and not the training module.

A third and final email will be sent to all the GPs who have successfully answered the second survey, 3 months after the date of receipt of their second survey response. This final survey will likewise, contain five clinical vignettes of similar nature to those of the two previous surveys. The responses of GPs in the intervention group will then be compared before and immediately after the online training video and also 3-months later; as well as to the control group.

Recruitment:

The research team will recruit the GPs from an existing GP database which has been created from previous studies conducted in the Petaling District and Kuala Lumpur. A researcher and a research assistant will be responsible for identifying and recruiting eligible participants. An invitation letter, a study summary, a participant information sheet and consent form will be sent via email to each GP. Consenting participants will be remunerated for their time and effort spent in participating in the study. In the event response is poor, a research assistant may need to arrange an appointment to visit the GPs at their clinics'.

Analysis:

The McNemar test will be used to determine the phase differences in the proportion of GPs who perform screening unnecessarily and the differences between the intervention and control group. Chi square test will be used to compare the difference in proportions between the intervention and control groups. GPs' characteristics associated with unnecessary screening practice will be explored using logistic regression models using phase 1 data. Logistic regression will be used for binary outcomes and the analyses will be adjusted for baseline data. SPSS will be used to manage the data sets

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
96

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Malaysia
    • Lembah Pantai
      • Kuala Lumpur, Lembah Pantai, Malaysia, 59100
        • Department of Primary Care Medicine, University of Malaya Medical Centre

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Full time general practitioners in the Klang valley (Petaling district and Kuala Lumpur)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • GPs who do not see male patients

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: Training module (Intervention)
Responses of GPs in the intervention group will then be compared before and immediately after the online training video and also 3-months later
Other: Online training module
Responses of GPs in the intervention group will then be compared before and immediately after the online training video and also 3-months later; as well as to the control group.
No Intervention: No training module (Control)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Evaluation of effectiveness of online training module among general practitioners in prostate cancer screening
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 6 months
Difference in the change in proportions of appropriate prostate cancer screening from baseline by GPs between intervention (online training module) and control (no online training module) groups.
Through study completion, an average of 6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Post-online training module knowledge in prostate cancer screening
Time Frame: An average of 6 months
  1. Difference in the post-online training module knowledge and attitudes towards prostate cancer screening between the intervention and control groups.
  2. GPs' characteristics that are associated with prostate cancer screening
An average of 6 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University of Malaya

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Tun Firzara Abdul Malik, University of Malaya

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Helpful Links

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
July 25, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
April 15, 2019

Study Completion (Anticipated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
June 25, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
August 1, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 13, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
August 16, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
April 18, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
April 17, 2019

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
April 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • BK070-2016

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

IPD Plan Description

It is not yet known if there will be a plan to make IPD available.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Prostate Cancer Screening

Clinical Trials on Online training module

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings