Cargando…

Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making improves value-concordant decision-making around prostate cancer screening (PrCS). Yet, PrCS discussions remain complex, challenging and often emotional for physicians and average-risk men. OBJECTIVE: In July 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilkes, Michael, Srinivasan, Malathi, Cole, Galen, Tardif, Richard, Richardson, Lisa C., Plescia, Marcus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3797347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23649782
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2419-z
_version_ 1782287604235894784
author Wilkes, Michael
Srinivasan, Malathi
Cole, Galen
Tardif, Richard
Richardson, Lisa C.
Plescia, Marcus
author_facet Wilkes, Michael
Srinivasan, Malathi
Cole, Galen
Tardif, Richard
Richardson, Lisa C.
Plescia, Marcus
author_sort Wilkes, Michael
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Shared decision making improves value-concordant decision-making around prostate cancer screening (PrCS). Yet, PrCS discussions remain complex, challenging and often emotional for physicians and average-risk men. OBJECTIVE: In July 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a multidisciplinary expert panel to identify priorities for funding agencies and development groups to promote evidence-based, value-concordant decisions between men at average risk for prostate cancer and their physicians. DESIGN: Two-day multidisciplinary expert panel in Atlanta, Georgia, with structured discussions and formal consensus processes. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen panelists represented diverse specialties (primary care, medical oncology, urology), disciplines (sociology, communication, medical education, clinical epidemiology) and market sectors (patient advocacy groups, Federal funding agencies, guideline-development organizations). MAIN MEASURES: Panelists used guiding interactional and evaluation models to identify and rate strategies that might improve PrCS discussions and decisions for physicians, patients and health systems/society. Efficacy was defined as the likelihood of each strategy to impact outcomes. Effort was defined as the relative amount of effort to develop, implement and sustain the strategy. Each strategy was rated (1–7 scale; 7 = maximum) using group process software (ThinkTank(TM)). For each group, intervention strategies were grouped as financial/regulatory, educational, communication or attitudinal levers. For each strategy, barriers were identified. KEY RESULTS: Highly ranked strategies to improve value-concordant shared decision-making (SDM) included: changing outpatient clinic visit reimbursement to reward SDM; development of evidence-based, technology-assisted, point-of-service tools for physicians and patients; reframing confusing prostate cancer screening messages; providing pre-visit decision support interventions; utilizing electronic health records to promote benchmarking/best practices; providing additional training for physicians around value-concordant decision-making; and using re-accreditation to promote training. CONCLUSIONS: Conference outcomes present an expert consensus of strategies likely to improve value-concordant prostate cancer screening decisions. In addition, the methodology used to obtain agreement provides a model of successful collaboration around this and future controversial cancer screening issues, which may be of interest to funding agencies, educators and policy makers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2419-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3797347
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37973472013-10-22 Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening Wilkes, Michael Srinivasan, Malathi Cole, Galen Tardif, Richard Richardson, Lisa C. Plescia, Marcus J Gen Intern Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Shared decision making improves value-concordant decision-making around prostate cancer screening (PrCS). Yet, PrCS discussions remain complex, challenging and often emotional for physicians and average-risk men. OBJECTIVE: In July 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a multidisciplinary expert panel to identify priorities for funding agencies and development groups to promote evidence-based, value-concordant decisions between men at average risk for prostate cancer and their physicians. DESIGN: Two-day multidisciplinary expert panel in Atlanta, Georgia, with structured discussions and formal consensus processes. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen panelists represented diverse specialties (primary care, medical oncology, urology), disciplines (sociology, communication, medical education, clinical epidemiology) and market sectors (patient advocacy groups, Federal funding agencies, guideline-development organizations). MAIN MEASURES: Panelists used guiding interactional and evaluation models to identify and rate strategies that might improve PrCS discussions and decisions for physicians, patients and health systems/society. Efficacy was defined as the likelihood of each strategy to impact outcomes. Effort was defined as the relative amount of effort to develop, implement and sustain the strategy. Each strategy was rated (1–7 scale; 7 = maximum) using group process software (ThinkTank(TM)). For each group, intervention strategies were grouped as financial/regulatory, educational, communication or attitudinal levers. For each strategy, barriers were identified. KEY RESULTS: Highly ranked strategies to improve value-concordant shared decision-making (SDM) included: changing outpatient clinic visit reimbursement to reward SDM; development of evidence-based, technology-assisted, point-of-service tools for physicians and patients; reframing confusing prostate cancer screening messages; providing pre-visit decision support interventions; utilizing electronic health records to promote benchmarking/best practices; providing additional training for physicians around value-concordant decision-making; and using re-accreditation to promote training. CONCLUSIONS: Conference outcomes present an expert consensus of strategies likely to improve value-concordant prostate cancer screening decisions. In addition, the methodology used to obtain agreement provides a model of successful collaboration around this and future controversial cancer screening issues, which may be of interest to funding agencies, educators and policy makers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2419-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2013-05-07 2013-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3797347/ /pubmed/23649782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2419-z Text en © The Author(s) 2013 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Wilkes, Michael
Srinivasan, Malathi
Cole, Galen
Tardif, Richard
Richardson, Lisa C.
Plescia, Marcus
Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening
title Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening
title_full Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening
title_fullStr Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening
title_full_unstemmed Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening
title_short Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening
title_sort discussing uncertainty and risk in primary care: recommendations of a multi-disciplinary panel regarding communication around prostate cancer screening
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3797347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23649782
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2419-z
work_keys_str_mv AT wilkesmichael discussinguncertaintyandriskinprimarycarerecommendationsofamultidisciplinarypanelregardingcommunicationaroundprostatecancerscreening
AT srinivasanmalathi discussinguncertaintyandriskinprimarycarerecommendationsofamultidisciplinarypanelregardingcommunicationaroundprostatecancerscreening
AT colegalen discussinguncertaintyandriskinprimarycarerecommendationsofamultidisciplinarypanelregardingcommunicationaroundprostatecancerscreening
AT tardifrichard discussinguncertaintyandriskinprimarycarerecommendationsofamultidisciplinarypanelregardingcommunicationaroundprostatecancerscreening
AT richardsonlisac discussinguncertaintyandriskinprimarycarerecommendationsofamultidisciplinarypanelregardingcommunicationaroundprostatecancerscreening
AT plesciamarcus discussinguncertaintyandriskinprimarycarerecommendationsofamultidisciplinarypanelregardingcommunicationaroundprostatecancerscreening