Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The State of Prescreening Discussions About Prostate-specific Antigen Testing Following Implementation of the 2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force Statement.

Urology 2017 June
OBJECTIVE: To determine if the quality of prescreening discussions has changed following release of the United States Preventive Services Task Force statement against prostate cancer screening.

METHODS: This cross-sectional study used the 2012 and 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys. Respondents were categorized based on the year in which they responded to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey. Quality of prescreening discussion was operationalized as having discussed only advantages, only disadvantages, both advantages and disadvantages, or neither. Race/ethnicity, education level, income, insurance status, and having a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level actually drawn after prescreening counseling served as confounders in our multivariate analysis.

RESULTS: Among 217,053 men in the analytic sample, 37% were told about only advantages of PSA screening compared to 30% of men who were advised about both advantages and disadvantages. Men who were told about neither advantages nor disadvantages were more likely to be Hispanic, not graduate high school, have low income, and not have insurance. Controlling for covariates, men in 2014 were significantly more likely to have undergone PSA testing without having discussed either advantages or disadvantages than men in 2012.

CONCLUSION: Comprehensive prescreening discussions about advantages and disadvantages of PSA testing are critical to informed decision making about prostate cancer screening. Disparities not only exist with regard to the quality of prescreening discussions that patients receive from their providers prior to PSA testing across categories of race/ethnicity, education, income, and insurance status, but these disparities became more substantial between 2012 and 2014. Further investigation is warranted to elicit more specific reasons behind these variations.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app