Cargando…
Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study
OBJECTIVES: To examine how general practitioners (GPs) in the UK and GPs in Australia explain their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing practices and to illuminate how these explanations are similar and how they are different. DESIGN: A grounded theory study. SETTING: Primary care practices in A...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5168698/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27920082 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011932 |
_version_ | 1782483396387143680 |
---|---|
author | Pickles, Kristen Carter, Stacy M Rychetnik, Lucie Entwistle, Vikki A |
author_facet | Pickles, Kristen Carter, Stacy M Rychetnik, Lucie Entwistle, Vikki A |
author_sort | Pickles, Kristen |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To examine how general practitioners (GPs) in the UK and GPs in Australia explain their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing practices and to illuminate how these explanations are similar and how they are different. DESIGN: A grounded theory study. SETTING: Primary care practices in Australia and the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 69 GPs in Australia (n=40) and the UK (n=29). We included GPs of varying ages, sex, clinical experience and patient populations. All GPs interested in participating in the study were included. RESULTS: GPs' accounts revealed fundamental differences in whether and how prostate cancer screening occurred in their practice and in the broader context within which they operate. The history of prostate screening policy, organisational structures and funding models appeared to drive more prostate screening in Australia and less in the UK. In Australia, screening processes and decisions were mostly at the discretion of individual clinicians, and varied considerably, whereas the accounts of UK GPs clearly reflected a consistent, organisationally embedded approach based on local evidence-based recommendations to discourage screening. CONCLUSIONS: The GP accounts suggested that healthcare systems, including historical and current organisational and funding structures and rules, collectively contribute to how and why clinicians use the PSA test and play a significant role in creating the mindlines that GPs employ in their clinic. Australia's recently released consensus guidelines may support more streamlined and consistent care. However, if GP mindlines and thus routine practice in Australia are to shift, to ultimately reduce unnecessary or harmful prostate screening, it is likely that other important drivers at all levels of the screening process will need to be addressed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5168698 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51686982016-12-22 Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study Pickles, Kristen Carter, Stacy M Rychetnik, Lucie Entwistle, Vikki A BMJ Open General practice / Family practice OBJECTIVES: To examine how general practitioners (GPs) in the UK and GPs in Australia explain their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing practices and to illuminate how these explanations are similar and how they are different. DESIGN: A grounded theory study. SETTING: Primary care practices in Australia and the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 69 GPs in Australia (n=40) and the UK (n=29). We included GPs of varying ages, sex, clinical experience and patient populations. All GPs interested in participating in the study were included. RESULTS: GPs' accounts revealed fundamental differences in whether and how prostate cancer screening occurred in their practice and in the broader context within which they operate. The history of prostate screening policy, organisational structures and funding models appeared to drive more prostate screening in Australia and less in the UK. In Australia, screening processes and decisions were mostly at the discretion of individual clinicians, and varied considerably, whereas the accounts of UK GPs clearly reflected a consistent, organisationally embedded approach based on local evidence-based recommendations to discourage screening. CONCLUSIONS: The GP accounts suggested that healthcare systems, including historical and current organisational and funding structures and rules, collectively contribute to how and why clinicians use the PSA test and play a significant role in creating the mindlines that GPs employ in their clinic. Australia's recently released consensus guidelines may support more streamlined and consistent care. However, if GP mindlines and thus routine practice in Australia are to shift, to ultimately reduce unnecessary or harmful prostate screening, it is likely that other important drivers at all levels of the screening process will need to be addressed. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-12-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5168698/ /pubmed/27920082 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011932 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | General practice / Family practice Pickles, Kristen Carter, Stacy M Rychetnik, Lucie Entwistle, Vikki A Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study |
title | Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study |
title_full | Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study |
title_fullStr | Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study |
title_full_unstemmed | Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study |
title_short | Doctors' perspectives on PSA testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between Australia and the UK: a qualitative study |
title_sort | doctors' perspectives on psa testing illuminate established differences in prostate cancer screening rates between australia and the uk: a qualitative study |
topic | General practice / Family practice |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5168698/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27920082 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011932 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pickleskristen doctorsperspectivesonpsatestingilluminateestablisheddifferencesinprostatecancerscreeningratesbetweenaustraliaandtheukaqualitativestudy AT carterstacym doctorsperspectivesonpsatestingilluminateestablisheddifferencesinprostatecancerscreeningratesbetweenaustraliaandtheukaqualitativestudy AT rychetniklucie doctorsperspectivesonpsatestingilluminateestablisheddifferencesinprostatecancerscreeningratesbetweenaustraliaandtheukaqualitativestudy AT entwistlevikkia doctorsperspectivesonpsatestingilluminateestablisheddifferencesinprostatecancerscreeningratesbetweenaustraliaandtheukaqualitativestudy |