Impact of a Printed Decision Aid on Patients' Intent to Undertake Prostate Cancer Screening (PSAMG)

June 4, 2014 updated by: TRAN Viet thi, University Paris 7 - Denis Diderot

Impact of a Printed Decision Aid on Patients' Intent to Undertake Prostate Cancer Screening: a Multicenter Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

Although the number of recommendations against systematic screening of prostate cancer, 70% of patients still request testing because they overestimate the benefits and are unaware of the limitations.

The investigators aim is to assess the impact of a short printed decision aid presenting benefits and limits of screening, on patients' intent to undergo prostate cancer screening.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

A Cochrane systematic review of 5 randomized controlled trials showed that screening for prostate cancer, using digital rectal examination and dosage of prostate specific antigen (PSA), did not significantly decrease prostate cancer specific mortality. Rather, screening for prostate cancer often led to over-diagnosis by detecting tumors that would not otherwise have become symptomatic or by producing false positive results. It could therefore result in unnecessary supplementary testing (including prostate biopsies), inadequate and/or harmful treatment, and negative psychological outcomes among patients.

Although the growing number of recommendations against PSA testing for screening of prostate cancer, 70% of patients still request testing prior to any information because they overestimate the benefits and are unaware of the limitations. As a result, about 55% of patients between 50 and 74 years old, undergo prostate cancer screening in the USA every year, despite recommendations against it.

To help patients understand the complexities about PSA testing for prostate cancer screening, professional organizations encourage physicians and patients to use decision aids to make informed decisions.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a decision aid, usable in daily practice by general practitioners, presenting harms and benefits of prostate cancer screening on patients' intent to undergo screening.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

1170

Phase

  • 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

  • France
      • Paris, France, 75000
        • SFTG

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

Ages Eligible for Study

50 years to 75 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

Male

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • male patients from 50 to 75 years old

Exclusion Criteria:

  • personal history of prostate cancer
  • any urinary tract symptoms
  • history of prostate cancer in a first degree relative
  • known exposition to chlordecone

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: Screening
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Control arm
Usual care
Experimental: Intervention arm
The intervention was the use of a decision aid.
Other: Decision aid
Intervention was use of a decision aid. Decision aid contained information about: 1) the epidemiology of prostate cancer; 2) what is a PSA test and advantages and limits of screening for prostate cancer using it (including risk of overtreatment and risk of becoming impotent and/or incontinent) and; 3) the position on screening for prostate cancer of major scientific societies in France at the time of the study. The second page contained a visual representation of the benefits of PSA screening for prostate cancer versus usual care based on the results of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer trial (ERSPC) The decision aid was pretested with 20 patients to ensure clarity and wording. It was revised accordingly to comments.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
patients' intent to undergo screening for prostate cancer
Time Frame: Immediate
patients' intent to undergo screening for prostate cancer was assessed by the question: "Do you want to be screened (or in case you have already been screened before, do intend to continue to be screened) for prostate cancer?" in a self administered questionnaire. Patients could answer "Yes", "No" or "I don't know", measured one time after receiving the decision aid or not.
Immediate

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Reasons to undergo or not screening for prostate cancer
Time Frame: Immediate
We systematically asked patients to elicit reasons underlying their answers using open-ended questions. Answers were read by a single investigator (EKR) and classified into categories. We compared proportion of individuals eliciting ech reason between the 2 arms
Immediate

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

University Paris 7 - Denis Diderot

Collaborators

University of Paris 5 - Rene Descartes

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Viet Thi Tran, MD, Paris Diderot University

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

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

November 1, 2012

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2013

Study Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 3, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 4, 2014

First Posted (Estimate)

June 5, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

June 5, 2014

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 4, 2014

Last Verified

June 1, 2014

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • DMG1

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

Clinical Trials on Decision aid

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Malawi

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

3
Subscribe