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
. 2021 Aug;24(4):1403-1412.
doi: 10.1111/hex.13275. Epub 2021 Jun 7.

Delivering the unexpected-Information needs for PSA screening from Men's perspective: A qualitative study

Katrin Kuss  1 , Charles Christian Adarkwah  1   2 , Miriam Becker  1 , Norbert Donner-Banzhoff  1 , Kathrin Schloessler  1   3
Affiliations

Delivering the unexpected-Information needs for PSA screening from Men's perspective: A qualitative study

Katrin Kuss et al. Health Expect. 2021 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Making decisions about PSA screening tests is challenging, as it requires both knowledge of the possible benefits and harms of screening and an individual assessment of the patient's values. Our research explores how much and what information men perceive to be necessary with regard to screening for prostate cancer.

Objective: To explore men's information and associated needs for decision making in PSA testing.

Design: Qualitative interview study.

Setting and participants: We interviewed 32 men (aged 55-69) about their decision making on PSA screening following counselling with a Decision Aid at their GP's or urologist's practice in Germany.

Main outcome measures: Men's expressed needs for decision making in PSA testing.

Methods: All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed by framework analysis.

Results: Comprehensive pre-screening counselling is needed. For the men in our study, information about test (in)accuracy, the benefit-harm balance and consequences of the test were relevant and surprising. Additional needs were for interpretation support, a take-home summary and time for deliberation. For several men, their physician's attitude was of interest. After being well-informed, most men felt empowered to make a preference-based decision on their own.

Discussion: Men were surprised by what they learned, especially regarding the accuracy and possible harms of screening. There is large variation in the breadth and depth of information needed, and some controversy regarding the consequences of testing.

Conclusion and patient contribution: A core set of information should be offered before men make their first PSA screening decision. Information about biopsy and associated side-effects could follow in a short form, with details only on request. Knowledge about a high rate of false-positive test results beforehand might help men handle a suspicious test result.

Keywords: consumer health information; counselling; decision aid; prostate-specific antigen (PSA); qualitative research; shared decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

KK, KS, CCA and MB have no conflicts of interest to declare. NDB is Co‐CEO of the ‘Gesellschaft für Patientenzentrierte Kommunikation’ (Organization for Patient‐centred Communication). This is a registered non‐profit entity contracting with health insurers and providers aiming at the dissemination of arriba decision support software. He obtains no financial revenue from this organization apart from travel expenses.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Men's decision support needs
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ, Welch HG. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA. 2004;291(1):71‐78. - PubMed
    1. Waller J, Osborne K, Wardle J. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in Great Britain: a general population survey. Br J Cancer. 2014;112(3):562‐566. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ilic D, Djulbegovic M, Jung JH, et al. Prostate cancer screening with prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) test: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. BMJ. 2018;362:k3519. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow‐up. Lancet. 2014;384:2027‐2035. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fenton JJ, Weyrich MS, Durbin S, Liu Y, Bang H, Melnikow J. Prostate‐specific antigen‐based screening for prostate cancer: Evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914‐1931. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances