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
. 2012 Jun;6(3):188-93.
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.11290.

Prostate cancer screening: Attitudes and practices of family physicians in Ontario

Christopher B Allard  1 , Shawn Dason, Janis Lusis, Anil Kapoor
Affiliations

Prostate cancer screening: Attitudes and practices of family physicians in Ontario

Christopher B Allard et al. Can Urol Assoc J. 2012 Jun.

Abstract

Introduction: : The utility of prostate cancer screening is controversial. We sought to determine whether Ontario's family physicians believe it is beneficial and to characterize their screening protocols.

Methods: : A survey was developed with input from urologists, family physicians and the Ontario Medical Association's Section on General and Family Practice. Questions covered three domains: (1) demographics, (2) beliefs about screening utility and (3) screening practices. All 7302 family physicians in Ontario were invited by email to complete the online survey.

Results: : A total of 969 physicians completed the survey; 955 (52.0% male, 48.0% female) were included. Most (80.97%) use prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE) for screening; 9.4% use DRE alone and 7.15% PSA. Of the respondents, 8.3% do not offer prostate cancer screening. Most physicians begin offering screening at age 50 (72.9%) and stop at ages 70 or 80 (68.4%); 17.9% offer lifelong screening. In response to the statement "screening with DRE provides a survival benefit," 37.6% and 32.6 agreed and disagreed, respectively. For "screening with PSA provides a survival benefit," 43.3% agreed and 31.0% disagreed. For the statement "the benefits of prostate cancer screening outweigh the risks," 51.4% agreed and 22.0% disagreed.

Discussion: : Although 91.7% of respondents offer prostate cancer screening, they are divided over its utility. Only 51.4% were convinced that the benefits outweighed the harms. There is significant variability between physicians' screening protocols. A limitation of this study is the possibility of selection bias. Nevertheless, this is the largest sample of Ontario family physicians ever surveyed about prostate cancer screening and highlights divergent physician practices and a need for more conclusive evidence on screening utility.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Method of prostate cancer screening. DRE: digital rectal examination; PSA: prostate-specific antigen; TRUS: transrectal ultrasound.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Illustration of when respondents stopped offering prostate cancer screening.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Illustration of the percentage of men who chose to undergo screening.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Beliefs about the utility of screening. DRE: digital rectal examination; PSA: prostate-specific antigen.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Canadian Cancer Society’s Steering Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2011. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2011.
    1. Ries LA, Melbert D, Krapcho M, et al. National Cancer Institute; SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2005. Available: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2005/ (Accessed May 2, 2012).
    1. Bunting PS, Vivek G, Williams JI, et al. Prostate-specific antigen testing in Ontario: reasons for testing patients without diagnosed prostate cancer. CMAJ. 1999;160:71–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gibbons L, Waters C. Prostate cancer: testing, incidence, surgery and mortality. Health Rep. 2003;14:9–20. - PubMed
    1. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ratliff TL, et al. Detection of organ-confined prostate cancer is increasing through prostate-specific antigen-based screening. JAMA. 1993;270:948–54. doi: 10.1001/jama.1993.03510080052031. - DOI - PubMed