Qualitative study on decision-making by prostate cancer physicians during active surveillance

BJU International

Volumn 120, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 32-39

  Loeb, Stacy ^a,b   Curnyn, Caitlin ^a   Fagerlin, Angela ^c,d   Braithwaite, Ronald Scott ^a   Schwartz, Mark D ^a   Lepor, Herbert ^a,b   Carter, Herbert Ballentine ^e   Sedlander, Erica ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d VA Salt Lake City Informatics Decision Enhancement and Surveillance (IDEAS) Center   (United States)

^e JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

active surveillance; markers; prostate cancer; qualitative; survey

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; COMFORT; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ONCOLOGIST; PATIENT CARE; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PHYSICIAN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; UNITED STATES; WATCHFUL WAITING;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PHYSICIANS; PRACTICE PATTERNS, PHYSICIANS'; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; UNITED STATES; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 84990210387     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bju.13651     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990–2013. JAMA 2015; 7: 80–2
2. Loeb S, Berglund A, Stattin P. Population based study of use and determinants of active surveillance and watchful waiting for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2013; 190: 1742–9
3. Weerakoon M, Papa N, Lawrentschuk N et al. The current use of active surveillance in an Australian cohort of men: a pattern of care analysis from the Victorian Prostate Cancer Registry. BJU Int 2015; 115 (Suppl. 5): 50–6
4. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 1: 126–31
5. Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011; 1: 2185–90
6. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 61–71
7. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol 2007; 177: 2106–31
8. National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf. Accessed January 2016
9. Loeb S, Carter HB, Schwartz M, Fagerlin A, Braithwaite RS, Lepor H. Heterogeneity in active surveillance protocols worldwide. Rev Urol 2014; 16: 202–3
10. Gorin MA, Eldefrawy A, Ekwenna O, Soloway MS. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: knowledge, acceptance and practice among urologists. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2012; 15: 177–81
11. Philippou Y, Raja H, Gnanapragasam VJ. Active surveillance of prostate cancer: a questionnaire survey of urologists, clinical oncologists and urology nurse specialists across three cancer networks in the United Kingdom. BMC Urol 2015; 15: 52
12. Curry LA, Nembhard IM, Bradley EH. Qualitative and mixed methods provide unique contributions to outcomes research. Circulation 2009; 17: 1442–52
13. Patton M. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1990
14. Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health 2015; 42: 533–44
15. Kreuger RC, Casey MA. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2009
16. Marshall M. Sampling for qualitative research. Family Pract 1996; 13: 522–5
17. Davison BJ, Oliffe JL, Pickles T, Mroz L. Factors influencing men undertaking active surveillance for the management of low-risk prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2009; 36: 89–96
18. O'Callaghan C, Dryden T, Hyatt A et al. ‘What is this active surveillance thing?’ Men's and partners’ reactions to treatment decision making for prostate cancer when active surveillance is the recommended treatment option. Psychooncology 2014; 23: 1391–8
19. Kazer MW, Bailey DE Jr, Colberg J, Kelly WK, Carroll P. The needs for men undergoing active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer: results of a focus group study. J Clin Nurs 2011; 20: 581–6
20. Mishra MV, Bennett M, Vincent A et al. Identifying barriers to patient acceptance of active surveillance: content analysis of online patient communications. PLoS One 2013; 8: e68563
21. Averill JB. Matrix analysis as a complementary analytic strategy in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res 2002; 12: 855–66
22. NVivo qualitative data analysis software. QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10, 2012
23. Guest G, MacQueen KM, Namey EE. Applied Thematic Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc, 2012
24. Hoffman KE, Niu J, Shen Y et al. Physician variation in management of low-risk prostate cancer: a population-based cohort study. JAMA Intern Med 2014; 174: 1450–9
25. Goldberger JJ, Buxton AE. PErsonalized medicine vs guideline-based medicine. JAMA 2013; 309: 2559–60
26. Tosoian JJ, Carter HB, Lepor A, Loeb S. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: current evidence and contemporary state of practice. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 13: 205–15
27. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 876–92
28. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2014; 6: 932–42
29. Alam R, Carter HB, Landis P, Epstein JI, Mamawala M. Conditional probability of reclassification in an active surveillance program for prostate cancer. J Urol 2015; 193: 1950–5
30. Ganz PA, Barry JM, Burke W et al. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference: role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med 2012; 17: 591–5
31. Bratt O, Carlsson S, Holmberg E et al. The Study of Active Monitoring in Sweden (SAMS): a randomized study comparing two different follow-up schedules for active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer. Scand J Urol 2013; 47: 347–55
32. Medscape. Medscape Physician Compensation Report 2015, 2015. Available at: http://www.medscape.com/features/slideshow/compensation/2015/public/overview#page=14. Accessed January 2016
33. Association AU. AUA Census Highlights State of Urology Workforce, 2015. Available at: https://www.auanet.org/advnews/press_releases/article.cfm?articleNo=405. Accessed March 2016