Not long ago, I was talking with a news reporter about an article we published on how surgical decisions are made. The paper reported that surgery patients too often were not given enough information about reasonable options. During our discussion the reporter remarked that the findings of the study were all well and good for some people, but didn’t apply to her elderly dad. Her dad would never have wanted to have information or be involved in medical decisions about his care. Instead, he would just look to his wife to tell him what to do.
The debate over the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's (USPSTF) final recommendation on PSA testing continued this week. Michael Barry, president of the Informed Medical Decisions Foundation and Mary McNaughton-Collins, medical director, each had an opportunity to speak on NPR radio programs about the USPSTF recommendation this week. They voiced their views on the recommendation -- both from the perspective of the Foundation and as practicing primary care physicians.
The Ottawa Personal Decision Guide (OPDG) is a general decision aid tool that can be used for any medical decision.
The objective of this study was to learn how decisions were made for two major preference-sensitive interventions: prostate cancer surgery and coronary artery stenting. Through a mail survey of probability samples of patients who underwent these two procedures, the authors found that while prostate cancer surgery patients reported more involvement in the decision making process than elective stent patients, both reports illustrated the need for increased efforts to inform and involve patients facing preference-sensitive intervention decisions.
Policies to promote shared decision making are becoming prominent in the United States, Canada, and United Kingdom. This is partly because of a recognition of the ethical imperative to properly involve patients in decisions about their care and partly because of the acrruing evidence that the approach has benefits. Shared decision making is an approach where clinicians and patients make decisions together using the best available evidence.
This study will investigate public perceptions of breast, prostate and colorectal cancer screening by contrasting popular media messages with evidence based information.
The objectives are to 1) Survey mobile use around health issues in men newly eligible for prostate cancer screening, and 2) to develop a mobile PSA decision aid prototype based on the previously validated internet-based Prosdex decision support intervention (DESI) in preparation for subsequent field testing.