Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
World Journal of Urology
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology 4/2008

01.08.2008 | Original Article

Does educational printed material manage to change compliance with prostate cancer screening?

verfasst von: Konstantinos Stamatiou, Andreas Skolarikos, Ioannis Heretis, Vaios Papadimitriou, Alevizos Alevizos, Georgios Ilias, Vasilissa Karanasiou, Anargiros Mariolis, Frank Sofras

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 4/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background/aim

The effects of printed educational material on cancer screening in women (Pap test and mammography) are well documented and confirmed by several studies. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of similar printed educational material on prostate cancer screening by PSA and DRE.

Material and methods

Thousand five hundred men aged between 50 and 86 years of age, who attended our institutions for various medical conditions except prostate-related conditions, were randomly assigned to two study groups. Men in the informed group, received an educational leaflet with simple, general information on prostate cancer screening methods given by their physician along with treatment and other regular recommendations, while men in the non-informed group, were only informed by their physician in the examination room during an interview.

Results

After 24 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of DRE screening. The percentages of men who were actually screened by DRE were 4 and 5% in the informed and non-informed groups, respectively, while the difference in the percentages of PSA screening was of statistical significance, with 31% of men screened in the non-informed group as compared to 93% of men screened in the informational leaflet group.

Conclusions

A single, one-shift distribution of printed educational material on prostate cancer screening, changed their attitude regarding prostate cancer screening only in favour of PSA testing, while did not manage to change the DRE acceptance behavior. However, since the combination of the two tests is more sensitive for diagnosis than either one alone, there is a need of introducing intervention strategies, in the efforts of ameliorating the prostate cancer screening behavior.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Silva JS, Zawilski AJ (1992) The health care professional’s workstation: its functional components and user impact. In: Ball MJ, Collen MF (eds) Aspects of the computer-based patient record. Springer, New York, pp 103–123
2.
No author listed (1996) Guide to clinical preventive services, 2nd edn. Report of the US Preventive Services Task Force. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 119–34
3.
Boling W, Laufman L, Lynch GR, Weinberg AD (2005) Increasing mammography screening through inpatient education. J Cancer Educ 20(4):247–250PubMedCrossRef
4.
Webster P, Austoker J (2007) Does the english breast screening programme’s information leaflet improve women’s knowledge about mammography screening? A before and after questionnaire survey. J Public Health (Oxf) 29(2):173–177CrossRef
5.
Franceschi S (2005) The IARC commitment to cancer prevention: the example of papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 166:277–297PubMedCrossRef
6.
Osterling JE (1996) Early detection of prostate cancer. Decreasing the mortality rate. Minn Med 79:46–9
7.
Kramer BS, Brown ML, Prorok PC, Potosky AL, Gohagan JK (1993) Prostate cancer screening: what we know and what we need to know. Ann Intern Med 119:914–923PubMed
8.
Woolf HS (1995) Screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen: an examination of evidence. N Engl J Med 333:1401–1405PubMedCrossRef
9.
Krist A, Woolf S, Johnson R, Kerns W (2007) Patient education on prostate cancer screening and involvement in decision making. Ann Fam Med 5(2):112–119PubMedCrossRef
10.
Frosch DL, Kaplan RM, Felitti VJ (2003) A randomized controlled trial comparing Internet and video to facilitate patient education for men considering the prostate specific antigen test. J Gen Intern Med 18(10):781–787PubMedCrossRef
11.
Auvinen A, Calais Da Silva F, Denis LJ, Hugosson J, Schroeder F (1996) The European Randomised Study for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). International Cooperation and Preliminary Data. Parthenon, New York, pp 167–172
12.
No author listed (1999) The International Prostate Screening Trial Evaluation Group. Rationale for randomised trials of prostate cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 35:262–271
13.
de Koning HJ, Auvinen A, Berenguer-Sanchez A et al (2002) Large-scale randomized prostate cancer screening trials; program performance in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Int J Cancer 97:237–244PubMedCrossRef
14.
de Koning HJ, Liem MK, Baan CA, Boer R, Schroder FH, Alexander FE, ERSPC (2002) Prostate cancer mortality reduction by screening: power and time frame with complete enrollment in the European Randomised Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial. Int J Cancer 98:268–273PubMedCrossRef
15.
Prorok PC, Andriole GL, Bresalier RS, Buys SS, Chia D, Crawford ED, Fogel R, Gelmann EP, Gilbert F, Hasson MA, Hayes RB, Johnson CC, Mandel JS, Oberman A, O’Brien B, Oken MM, Rafla S, Reding D, Rutt W, Weissfeld JL, Yokochi L, Gohagan JK (2000) Design of the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial. Control Clin Trials 21:273S–309SPubMedCrossRef
16.
Harris R, Lohr KN (2002) Screening for prostate cancer: an update of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 137:917–929PubMed
17.
Graif T, Yu X, Loeb S (2006) Underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis of prostate cancer. Program and abstracts of the American Urological Association 2006 Annual Meeting; May 20–25, Atlanta, Georgia, Abstract 476
18.
Oliffe J (2006) Being screened for prostate cancer: a simple blood test or a commitment to treatment? Cancer Nurs 2006 04/
19.
Deliveliotis C, Alivizatos G, Karayiannis A, Kontothanasis D, Makrychoritis K, Lysiotis P, Dimopoulos MA (1995) The value of prostatic specific antigen in the early diagnosis of prostatic cancer: a Greek view. Br J Urol 75(5):637–641PubMed
20.
Stamatiou K, Alevizos A, Agapitos E, Sofras F (2006) Incidence of impalpable carcinoma of the prostate and of non-malignant and precarcinomatous lesions in Greek male population: an autopsy study. Prostate;2006:10; [Epub ahead of print]
21.
No author listed. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality “The Guide to Clinical Preventive Services 2005: Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.” 2005
22.
Advisory Committee on Cancer Prevention (2000) Position paper. Recommendations on cancer screening in European Union. Eur J Cancer 36:1473–1478CrossRef
23.
Holund B (1980) Latent prostatic cancer in a consecutive autopsy series. Scand J Urol Nephrol 14:29–43PubMedCrossRef
24.
Haggerty J, Tudiver F, Brown JB, Herbert C, Ciampi A, Guibert R (2005) Patients’ anxiety and expectations. How they influence family physicians’ decisions to order cancer screening tests. Can Fam Physician 51(12):1659
25.
Constantinou J, Feneley MR (2006) PSA testing: an evolving relationship with prostate cancer screening. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 9:6–13PubMedCrossRef
26.
Bowersox J (1992) American Cancer Society adopts new prostate cancer screening guidelines. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:1856–1857PubMedCrossRef
27.
Mettlin C, Jones GW, Averette H, Gusberg SB, Murphy GP (1993) Defining and updating the American Cancer Society guidelines for the cancer related checkup: prostate and endometrial cancer. Cancer J Clin 43:42–46CrossRef
28.
Weinrich SP, Wienrich MC, Boyd MD, Atkinson C (1998) The impact of prostate cancer knowledge on cancer screening. Oncol Nurs Forum 25:527–34PubMed
29.
Abbott R, Taylor DK, Barber K (1998) A comparison of prostate knowledge of African American and Caucasian men: changes from prescreening baseline to postintervention. Cancer J 4:175
30.
Weinrich SP, Boyd MD, Weinrich M, Greene F, Reynolds WA Jr, Metlin C (1998) Increasing prostate cancer screening in African American men with peer-educator and client-navigator interventions. J Cancer Educ 13(4):213–219PubMed
31.
Davison BJ, Kirk P (1999) Information and patient participation in screening for prostate cancer. Patient Educ Couns 37(3):255–263PubMedCrossRef
32.
Lewis D (1999) Computer-based approaches to patient education: a review of the literature. J Am Med Inform Assoc 6:272–282PubMed
33.
Hammond CS, Wasson JH et al (2001) A frequently used patient and physician-directed educational intervention does nothing to improve primary care of prostate conditions. Urology 58(6):875–881PubMedCrossRef
34.
Weinrich SP, Seger R, Miller BL, Davis C, Kim S, Wheeler C, Weinrich M (2004) Knowledge of the limitations associated with prostate cancer screening among low-income men. Cancer Nurs 27(6):442–453PubMedCrossRef
35.
Lockman AR (2001) Does the manner in which information about prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is presented affect screening rates? Jour Fam Pract 50(10):898
36.
Frosch DL, Kaplan RM, Felitti VJ (2003) A randomized controlled trial comparing Internet and video to facilitate patient education for men considering the prostate specific antigen test. J Gen Intern Med 18(10):781–787PubMedCrossRef
37.
Tingen M, Weinrich S, Heydt D, Boyd M, Weinrich M (1998) Perceived benefits: a predictor of participation in prostate cancer screening. Cancer Nurs 21:349–357PubMedCrossRef
38.
Van Den Eeden S, Enger S, Caan B (2003) Predictors of having a PSA test (abstract). Am J Epidemiol 157:abstract 368
39.
Steenland K Rodriguez C, Mondul A, Calle E, Thun M (2004) Prostate cancer incidence and survival in relation to education. Cancer Causes Control 15:939–945CrossRef
40.
Kripalani S, Sharma J, Justice E, Justice J, Spiker C, Laufman LE, Jacobson TA, Weinberg AD (2005) Prostate cancer screening in a low-literacy population: does informed decision making occur? Cancer C Control 12(2):116–117
41.
Myers RE, Hyslop T, Wolf TA, Burgh D, Kunkel EJ, Oyesanmi OA, Chodak GJ (2000) African–American men and intention to adhere to recommended follow-up for an abnormal prostate cancer early detection examination result. Urology 55(5):716–720PubMedCrossRef
42.
Schapira MM, VanRuiswyk J (2000) The effect of an illustrated pamphlet decision-aid on the use of prostate cancer screening tests. J Fam Pract 49(5):418–24PubMed
43.
Flood AB, Wennberg JE et al (1996) The importance of patient preference in the decision to screen for prostate cancer. Prostate patient outcomes research team. J Gen Intern Med 11(6):342PubMedCrossRef
44.
Kripalani S, Sharma J, Justice E, Justice J, Spiker C, Laufman LE, Price M, Weinberg AD (2007) Low-literacy interventions to promote discussion of prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med 33(2):83–90PubMedCrossRef
45.
Philip J, Dutta Roy S, Viswanathan P (2006) Digital rectal examination is a barrier to population-based prostate cancer screening. Urology 67(3):655PubMedCrossRef
46.
Mistry K, Cable G (2003) Meta-analysis of prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination as screening tests for prostate carcinoma. J Am Board Fam Pract 16(2):95–103PubMed
47.
Pruthi RS, Tornehl C, Gaston K, Lee K, Moore D, Carson CC, Wallen EM (2006) Impact of race, age, income, and residence on prostate cancer knowledge, screening behavior, and health maintenance in siblings of patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 50:64–69PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Does educational printed material manage to change compliance with prostate cancer screening?
verfasst von
Konstantinos Stamatiou
Andreas Skolarikos
Ioannis Heretis
Vaios Papadimitriou
Alevizos Alevizos
Georgios Ilias
Vasilissa Karanasiou
Anargiros Mariolis
Frank Sofras
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2008
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 4/2008
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-008-0258-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2008

World Journal of Urology 4/2008 Zur Ausgabe

Original Article

Silymarin attenuates the renal ischemia/reperfusion injury-induced morphological changes in the rat kidney

Topic Paper

A collagen matrix derived from bladder can be used to engineer smooth muscle tissue

Letter to the Editor

Comments on the article “Targeted therapy in renal cell carcinoma” by J.-J. Patard et al.

Review

Lower urinary-tract symptoms and testosterone in elderly men

Topic Paper

Tissue engineered testicular prostheses with prolonged testosterone release

Topic Paper

Bladder tissue engineering through nanotechnology

Neu im Fachgebiet Urologie

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

25.04.2024 Nierenkarzinom Nachrichten

Nun gibt es auch Resultate zum Gesamtüberleben: Eine adjuvante Pembrolizumab-Therapie konnte in einer Phase-3-Studie das Leben von Menschen mit Nierenzellkarzinom deutlich verlängern. Die Sterberate war im Vergleich zu Placebo um 38% geringer.

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

24.04.2024 DGIM 2024 Nachrichten

Patienten, die zur Behandlung ihres Prostatakarzinoms eine Androgendeprivationstherapie erhalten, entwickeln nicht selten eine Anämie. Wer ältere Patienten internistisch mitbetreut, sollte auf diese Nebenwirkung achten.

Stufenschema weist Prostatakarzinom zuverlässig nach

22.04.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Erst PSA-Test, dann Kallikrein-Score, schließlich MRT und Biopsie – ein vierstufiges Screening-Schema kann die Zahl der unnötigen Prostatabiopsien erheblich reduzieren: Die Hälfte der Männer, die in einer finnischen Studie eine Biopsie benötigten, hatte einen hochgradigen Tumor.

Harnwegsinfektprophylaxe: Es geht auch ohne Antibiotika

20.04.2024 EAU 2024 Kongressbericht

Beim chronischen Harnwegsinfekt bei Frauen wird bisher meist eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe eingesetzt. Angesichts der zunehmenden Antibiotikaresistenz erweist sich das Antiseptikum Methenamin-Hippurat als vielversprechende Alternative, so die Auswertung einer randomisierten kontrollierten Studie.

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise