Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2004 Aug;19(8):835-42.
doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30047.x.

Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors

Melissa R Partin  1 , David Nelson, David Radosevich, Sean Nugent, Ann B Flood, Nancy Dillon, Jeremy Holtzman, Michele Haas, Timothy J Wilt
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors

Melissa R Partin et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of video and pamphlet interventions on patient prostate cancer (CaP) screening knowledge, decision-making participation, preferences, and behaviors.

Design: Randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: Four midwestern Veterans Affairs medical facilities.

Patients/participants: One thousand, one hundred fifty-two male veterans age 50 and older with primary care appointments at participating facilities were randomized and 893 completed follow-up.

Interventions: Patients were randomized to mailed pamphlet, mailed video, or usual care/control.

Measurements and main results: Outcomes assessed by phone survey 2 weeks postintervention included a 10-item knowledge index; correct responses to questions on CaP natural history, treatment efficacy, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA)'s predictive value, and expert disagreement about the PSA; whether screening was discussed with provider; screening preferences; and PSA testing rates. Mean knowledge index scores were higher for video (7.44; P = .001) and pamphlet (7.26; P = .03) subjects versus controls (6.90). Video and pamphlet subjects reported significantly higher percentages of correct responses relative to controls to questions on CaP natural history (63%, 63%, and 54%, respectively); treatment efficacy (19%, 20%, and 5%), and expert disagreement (28%, 19%, and 8%), but not PSA accuracy (28%, 22%, and 22%). Pamphlet subjects were more likely than controls to discuss screening with their provider (41% vs 32%; P = .03) but video subjects were not (35%; P = .33). Video and pamphlet subjects were less likely to intend to have a PSA, relative to controls (63%, 65%, and 74%, respectively). PSA testing rates did not differ significantly across groups.

Conclusions: Mailed interventions enhance patient knowledge and self-reported participation in decision making, and alter screening preferences. The pamphlet and video interventions evaluated are comparable in effectiveness. The lower-cost pamphlet approach is an attractive option for clinics with limited resources.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Study subject flow diagram.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures—2001. 5008.01. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society; 2001.
    1. American College of Physicians. Clinical guideline: screening for prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:480–4. - PubMed
    1. Office of Technology Assessment. Costs and effectiveness of prostate cancer screening in elderly men. OTA-BP-H-145. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1995.
    1. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ. American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer, 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003;53:27–43. - PubMed
    1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: recommendation and rationale. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:915–6. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances