JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The accuracy of patients' perceptions of the risks associated with localised prostate cancer treatments.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of patients' perceptions of the risks associated with localised prostate cancer treatments (radical prostatectomy [RP], radiotherapy [RT], and active surveillance [AS]), and to identify correlates of misperceptions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used baseline data (questionnaires completed after treatment information was provided but before treatment) of 426 patients with newly diagnosed localised prostate cancer who participated (87% response rate) in a prospective, longitudinal, multicentre study. Patients' pretreatment perceptions of differences in adverse outcomes of treatments were compared to those based on the literature. We used univariate and multivariate linear regression to identify correlates of misperceptions.

RESULTS: About two-thirds (68%, n = 211) of the patients did not understand that the risk of disease recurrence is comparable between RP and RT. More than half of the patients did not comprehend that RP patients are at greater risk of urinary incontinence (65%, n = 202) and erectile dysfunction (61%, n = 190), and less at risk of bowel problems (53%, n = 211) compared to RT patients. Many patients overestimated the risk of requiring definitive treatment following AS (45%, n = 157) and did not understand that mortality rates following AS, RP, and RT are comparable (80%, n = 333). Consulting a radiotherapist or a clinical nurse specialist was positively associated with, and emotional distress was negatively associated with, better understanding of the risks (P < 0.05), although effect sizes were small.

CONCLUSION: Prior to choosing treatment, most patients with prostate cancer poorly understood the differences in treatment risks. Greater efforts should be made to better understand why these misperceptions occur and, most importantly, how they can be corrected.

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.

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