Cargando…

Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES: Men diagnosed with low‐risk prostate cancer are typically eligible for active surveillance of their cancer, involving monitoring for cancer progression and making judgements about the risks of prostate cancer against those of active intervention. Our study examined how risk for prostate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hogden, Anne, Churruca, Kate, Rapport, Frances, Gillatt, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6803412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31095822
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12912
_version_ 1783460924601925632
author Hogden, Anne
Churruca, Kate
Rapport, Frances
Gillatt, David
author_facet Hogden, Anne
Churruca, Kate
Rapport, Frances
Gillatt, David
author_sort Hogden, Anne
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Men diagnosed with low‐risk prostate cancer are typically eligible for active surveillance of their cancer, involving monitoring for cancer progression and making judgements about the risks of prostate cancer against those of active intervention. Our study examined how risk for prostate cancer is perceived and experienced by patients undergoing active surveillance with their clinicians, how risk is communicated in clinical consultations, and the implications for treatment and care. METHOD: Participants were nine patients and three clinicians from a university hospital urology clinic. A staged, qualitative, multi‐method data collection approach was undertaken, comprising: observations of consultations; patient and clinician interviews; and patient surveys. The three data sets were analysed separately using thematic analysis and then integrated to give a comprehensive view of patient and clinician views. RESULTS: Thirty data points (eight patient surveys; 10 observations of consultations between patients and clinicians; 10 patient interviews; and two clinician interviews) combined to create a detailed picture of how patients perceived and appraised risk, in three themes of “Making sense of risk”, “Talking about risk” and “Responding to risk”. CONCLUSION: Effective risk communication needs to be finely tuned and timed to individual patient's priorities and information requirements. A structured information exchange process that identifies patients' priorities, and details key moments in risk assessment, so that complexities of risk are discussed in ways that are meaningful to patients, may benefit patient care. These findings could inform the development of patient‐centric risk assessment procedures and service delivery models in prostate cancer care more broadly.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6803412
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68034122019-10-24 Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer Hogden, Anne Churruca, Kate Rapport, Frances Gillatt, David Health Expect Original Research Papers OBJECTIVES: Men diagnosed with low‐risk prostate cancer are typically eligible for active surveillance of their cancer, involving monitoring for cancer progression and making judgements about the risks of prostate cancer against those of active intervention. Our study examined how risk for prostate cancer is perceived and experienced by patients undergoing active surveillance with their clinicians, how risk is communicated in clinical consultations, and the implications for treatment and care. METHOD: Participants were nine patients and three clinicians from a university hospital urology clinic. A staged, qualitative, multi‐method data collection approach was undertaken, comprising: observations of consultations; patient and clinician interviews; and patient surveys. The three data sets were analysed separately using thematic analysis and then integrated to give a comprehensive view of patient and clinician views. RESULTS: Thirty data points (eight patient surveys; 10 observations of consultations between patients and clinicians; 10 patient interviews; and two clinician interviews) combined to create a detailed picture of how patients perceived and appraised risk, in three themes of “Making sense of risk”, “Talking about risk” and “Responding to risk”. CONCLUSION: Effective risk communication needs to be finely tuned and timed to individual patient's priorities and information requirements. A structured information exchange process that identifies patients' priorities, and details key moments in risk assessment, so that complexities of risk are discussed in ways that are meaningful to patients, may benefit patient care. These findings could inform the development of patient‐centric risk assessment procedures and service delivery models in prostate cancer care more broadly. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-05-16 2019-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6803412/ /pubmed/31095822 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12912 Text en © 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Papers
Hogden, Anne
Churruca, Kate
Rapport, Frances
Gillatt, David
Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
title Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
title_full Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
title_fullStr Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
title_short Appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
title_sort appraising risk in active surveillance of localized prostate cancer
topic Original Research Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6803412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31095822
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12912
work_keys_str_mv AT hogdenanne appraisingriskinactivesurveillanceoflocalizedprostatecancer
AT churrucakate appraisingriskinactivesurveillanceoflocalizedprostatecancer
AT rapportfrances appraisingriskinactivesurveillanceoflocalizedprostatecancer
AT gillattdavid appraisingriskinactivesurveillanceoflocalizedprostatecancer