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
. 2015 May;175(5):792-9.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.63.

Shared decision making and use of decision AIDS for localized prostate cancer : perceptions from radiation oncologists and urologists

Affiliations

Shared decision making and use of decision AIDS for localized prostate cancer : perceptions from radiation oncologists and urologists

Elyn H Wang et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2015 May.

Abstract

Importance: The current attitudes of prostate cancer specialists toward decision aids and their use in clinical practice to facilitate shared decision making are poorly understood.

Objective: To assess attitudes toward decision aids and their dissemination in clinical practice.

Design, setting, and participants: A survey was mailed to a national random sample of 1422 specialists (711 radiation oncologists and 711 urologists) in the United States from November 1, 2011, through April 30, 2012.

Main outcomes and measures: Respondents were asked about familiarity, perceptions, and use of decision aids for clinically localized prostate cancer and trust in various professional societies in developing decision aids. The Pearson χ2 test was used to test for bivariate associations between physician characteristics and outcomes.

Results: Similar response rates were observed for radiation oncologists and urologists (44.0% vs 46.1%; P=.46). Although most respondents had some familiarity with decision aids, only 35.5% currently use a decision aid in clinic practice. The most commonly cited barriers to decision aid use included the perception that their ability to estimate the risk of recurrence was superior to that of decision aids (7.7% in those not using decision aids and 26.2% in those using decision aids; P<.001) and the concern that patients could not process information from a decision aid (7.6% in those not using decision aids and 23.7% in those using decision aids; P<.001). In assessing trust in decision aids established by various professional medical societies, specialists consistently reported trust in favor of their respective organizations, with 9.2% being very confident and 59.2% being moderately confident (P=.01).

Conclusions and relevance: Use of decision aids among specialists treating patients with prostate cancer is relatively low. Efforts to address barriers to clinical implementation of decision aids may facilitate greater shared decision making for patients diagnosed as having prostate cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Resolving the decision aid paradox.
    Barry MJ. Barry MJ. JAMA Intern Med. 2015 May;175(5):799-800. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.72. JAMA Intern Med. 2015. PMID: 25751275 No abstract available.

Publication types

MeSH terms