All care, but whose responsibility? Community juries reason about expert and patient responsibilities in prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer

Health (United Kingdom)

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 465-484

  Degeling, Chris ^a   Carter, Stacy M ^a   Rychetnik, Lucie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (Australia)

Author keywords

bioethics; cancer and palliative care; organisation of health services; patient physician relationship; risk and health

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AUSTRALIA; BLOOD; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MASS SCREENING; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PROSTATE TUMOR;

AUSTRALIA; DECISION MAKING; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MASS SCREENING; PHYSICIAN'S ROLE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84984828022     PISSN: 13634593     EISSN: 14617196     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1363459316660862     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. A.AndermannI.BlancquaertS.Beauchamp. (2008) Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: A review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bulletin of the World Health Organization86(4): 317–319.
2. J.ArcherM.Hayter (2006) Screening men for prostate cancer in general practice: Experiences of men receiving an equivocal PSA (prostate specific antigen) test result. Primary Health Care Research and Development7(2): 124–134.
3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2013) Prostate cancer in Australia. Available at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129545133
4. M.BarnesJ.NewmanH.C.Sullivan (2007) Power, Participation and Political Renewal: Case Studies in Public Participation. Bristol: The Policy Press.
5. J.BenbassatD.PilpelM.Tidhar (1998) Patients’ preferences for participation in clinical decision making: A review of published surveys. Behavioral Medicine24(2): 81–88.
6. J.Borkan (1999) Immersion/crystallization. In: (eds) Doing Qualitative Research. London: SAGE, pp. 179–194.
7. S.CarterV.EntwistleM.Little (2015) Relational conceptions of paternalism: A way to rebut nanny-state accusations and evaluate public health interventions. Public Health129(8): 1021–1029.
8. R.ChouJ.M.CroswellT.Dana. (2011) Screening for prostate cancer: A review of the evidence for the US preventive services task force. Annals of Internal Medicine155(11): 762–771.
9. J.Christman (2015) Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. In: (ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring2015 edition). Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/autonomy-moral/
10. A.ClementsE.WatsonT.Rai. (2007) The PSA testing dilemma: GPs’ reports of consultations with asymptomatic men: A qualitative study. BMC Family Practice8(1): 35.
11. N.CouëtS.DesrochesH.Robitaille. (2013) Assessments of the extent to which healthcare providers involve patients in decision making: A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument. Health Expectations18: 542–561.
12. R.B.DeberN.KraetschmerS.Urowitz. (2007) Do people want to be autonomous patients? Preferred roles in treatment decision-making in several patient populations. Health Expectations10(3): 248–258.
13. C.DegelingS.CarterL.Rychetnik (2015a) Which public and why deliberate? – A scoping review of public deliberation in public health and health policy research. Social Science & Medicine131: 114–121.
14. C.DegelingL.RychetnikK.Pickles. (2015b) “What should happen before asymptomatic men decide whether or not to have a PSA test?” A report on three community juries. The Medical Journal of Australia203(8): 335–335.
15. C.DohertyC.StavropoulouM.N.Saunders. (2015) The consent process: Enabling or disabling patients’ active participation?Health. Epub ahead of print 20October. DOI: 10.1177/1363459315611870.
16. V.A.EntwistleA.CribbI.S.Watt (2012) Shared decision-making: Enhancing the clinical relevance. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine105(10): 416–421.
17. R.L.FerrerJ.M.Gill (2013) Shared decision making, contextualized. Annals of Family Medicine11(4): 303–305.
18. L.J.Finney RuttenH.I.MeissnerN.Breen. (2005) Factors associated with men’s use of prostate-specific antigen screening: Evidence from Health Information National Trends Survey. Preventive Medicine40(4): 461–468.
19. J.M.FischerM.Ravizza (2000) Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. N.K.GaleG.HeathE.Cameron. (2013) Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology13: 117.
21. M.GattellariJ.E.Ward (2004) Will men attribute fault to their GP for adverse effects arising from controversial screening tests? An Australian study using scenarios about PSA screening. Journal of Medical Screening11(4): 165–169.
22. P.K.HanS.KobrinN.Breen. (2013) National evidence on the use of shared decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening. Annals of Family Medicine11(4): 306–314.
23. H.L.A.Hart (1968) Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the Philosophy of Law. New York: Oxford University Press.
24. K.HowardA.T.BrennerC.Lewis. (2013) A comparison of US and Australian men’s values and preferences for PSA screening. BMC Health Services Research13(1): 388.
25. D.IlicD.O’ConnorS.Green. (2011) Screening for prostate cancer: An updated Cochrane systematic review. BJU International107(6): 882–891.
26. S.J.Knight (2014) Decision making and prostate cancer screening. Urologic Clinics of North America41(2): 257–266.
27. R.Kukla (2005) Conscientious autonomy: Displacing decisions in health care. Hastings Center Report35(2): 34–44.
28. S.K.LinderM.A.KallenP.D.Mullen. (2014) Physician behaviors to promote informed decisions for prostate cancer screening: A National Research Network study. Journal of Cancer Education29(2): 345–349.
29. C.Mackenzie (2014) Three dimensions of autonomy: A relational analysis. In: (eds) Autonomy, Oppression and Gender. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 15–41.
30. N.MendickB.YoungC.Holcombe. (2010) The ethics of responsibility and ownership in decision-making about treatment for breast cancer: Triangulation of consultation with patient and surgeon perspectives. Social Science & Medicine70(12): 1904–1911.
31. V.A.Moyer (2012) Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine157(2): 120–134.
32. C.MuntheL.SandmanD.Cutas (2012) Person centred care and shared decision making: Implications for ethics, public health and research. Health Care Analysis20(3): 231–249.
33. K.PicklesS.M.CarterL.Rychetnik (2015) Doctors’ approaches to PSA testing and overdiagnosis in primary healthcare: A qualitative study. BMJ Open5(3): e006367.
34. C.E.PollackE.A.PlatzN.A.Bhavsar. (2012) Primary care providers’ perspectives on discontinuing prostate cancer screening. Cancer118(22): 5518–5524.
35. C.C.PurvisT.L.MerrittL.E.Ross. (2004) To screen or not to screen, when clinical guidelines disagree: Primary care physicians’ use of the PSA test. Preventive Medicine38(2): 182–191.
36. M.RobertsonJ.MoirJ.Skelton. (2011) When the business of sharing treatment decisions is not the same as shared decision making: A discourse analysis of decision sharing in general practice. Health15(1): 78–95.
37. L.RychetnikJ.DoustR.Thomas. (2014) A Community Jury on PSA screening: What do well-informed men want the government to do about prostate cancer screening – A qualitative analysis. BMJ Open4(4): e004682.
38. G.W.SabaS.T.WongD.Schillinger. (2006) Shared decision making and the experience of partnership in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine4(1): 54–62.
39. L.SandmanC.Munthe (2010) Shared decision making, paternalism and patient choice. Health Care Analysis18(1): 60–84.
40. L.M.SchwartzS.WoloshinFowler. (2004) Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association291(1): 71–78.
41. C.SindingP.HudakJ.Wiernikowski. (2010) ‘I like to be an informed person but …’ negotiating responsibility for treatment decisions in cancer care. Social Science & Medicine71(6): 1094–1101.
42. L.B.SquiersC.M.BannS.E.Dolina. (2013) Prostate-specific antigen testing: Men’s responses to 2012 recommendation against screening. American Journal of Preventive Medicine45(2): 182–189.
43. G.Strawson (1994) The impossibility of moral responsibility. Philosophical Studies75(1): 5–24.
44. I.VedelM.T.E.PutsM.Monette. (2011) The decision-making process in prostate cancer screening in primary care with a prostate-specific antigen: A systematic review. Journal of Geriatric Oncology2(3): 161–176.
45. N.A.Vincent (2011) A structured taxonomy of responsibility concepts. In: (eds) Moral Responsibility: Beyond Freewill and Determinism. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 15–35.
46. R.J.VolkS.T.HawleyS.Kneuper. (2007) Trials of decision aids for prostate cancer screening: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine33(5): 428–434.e411.
47. R.J.VolkS.K.LinderM.A.Kallen. (2013) Primary care physicians’ use of an informed decision-making process for prostate cancer screening. Annals of Family Medicine11(1): 67–74.
48. D.C.WheelerK.M.SzymanskiA.Black. (2011) Applying strategies from libertarian paternalism to decision making for prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening. BMC Cancer11(1): 148.
49. T.J.WiltP.T.ScardinoS.V.Carlsson. (2014) Prostate-specific antigen screening in prostate cancer: Perspectives on the evidence. Journal of the National Cancer Institute106(3): dju010. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju010.