You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 156 No. 12, 24 JUNE 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Impact of Informed Consent on Patient Interest in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening

Andrew M. D. Wolf, MD; Jonathan F. Nasser; Anne M. Wolf, MS; John B. Schorling, MD, MPH

Arch Intern Med. 1996;156(12):1333-1336.


Abstract

Background
Because of the many uncertainties surrounding screening for prostate cancer, authorities recommend that patients be involved in the screening decision.

Objective
To determine the impact of informed consent on patient interest in undergoing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening.

Methods
Men 50 years or older with no prior PSA testing and no history of prostate cancer presenting to 1 of 4 university-affiliated primary care practices were eligible for enrollment. Patients were randomized to receive either a scripted informational intervention simulating an informed consent presentation (intervention group, n=103) or a single sentence about the PSA (control group, n=102). The main outcome measure was patient interest in undergoing PSA screening measured on a 5-point Likert scale.

Results
Patients who received the informational intervention were significantly less interested in undergoing PSA screening than controls (mean difference in interest, 0.8 on 5-point scale, P<.001). Informed patients were much less likely to indicate high interest in screening (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.60; P<.001). In a multivariate model, family history of prostate cancer was associated with increased interest and advancing age with decreased interest in PSA screening, but the informational intervention remained the strongest predictor of interest.

Conclusions
Among primary care patients of predominantly lower socioeconomic status, those who received informed consent were significantly less interested in PSA screening than those who did not. For physicians who offer the PSA as a screening test, this finding highlights the importance of apprising patients of the associated benefits, burdens, and uncertainties and allowing them to participate in the screening decision.

(Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:1333-1336)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center (Drs Wolf and Schorling) and University of Virginia School of Medicine (Mr Nasser), Charlottesville; and Channing Laboratory, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (Ms Wolf). Ms Wolf is now with the University of Virginia Health Sciences Center.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Laypersons' Responses to the Communication of Uncertainty Regarding Cancer Risk Estimates
Han et al.
Med Decis Making 2009;29:391-403.
ABSTRACT  

Lack of Comprehension of Common Prostate Cancer Terms in an Underserved Population
Kilbridge et al.
JCO 2009;27:2015-2021.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Are Cancer-Related Decision Aids Effective? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
O'Brien et al.
JCO 2009;27:974-985.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Decision Making in Oncology: A Review of Patient Decision Aids to Support Patient Participation
Stacey et al.
CA Cancer J Clin 2008;58:293-304.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Do Patient Decision Aids Meet Effectiveness Criteria of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
O'Connor et al.
Med Decis Making 2007;27:554-574.
ABSTRACT  

Perceived Ambiguity about Screening Mammography Recommendations: Association with Future Mammography Uptake and Perceptions
Han et al.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:458-466.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Patient Education on Prostate Cancer Screening and Involvement in Decision Making
Krist et al.
Ann Fam Med 2007;5:112-119.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

PSA Screening Among Elderly Men With Limited Life Expectancies.
Walter et al.
JAMA 2006;296:2336-2342.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Educating African American Men about the Prostate Cancer Screening Dilemma: A Randomized Intervention.
Taylor et al.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:2179-2188.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Randomized Clinical Trials for Cancer Screening: Rationale and Design Considerations for Imaging Tests
Black
JCO 2006;24:3252-3260.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Presentation on websites of possible benefits and harms from screening for breast cancer: cross sectional study
Jorgensen and Gotzsche
BMJ 2004;328:148.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Randomised controlled trial of the effect of evidence based information on women's willingness to participate in cervical cancer screening
Adab et al.
J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2003;57:589-593.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

GP and patient predictors of PSA screening in Australian general practice
Gattellari et al.
Fam Pract 2003;20:294-303.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Informed Consent for Cancer Screening With Prostate-Specific Antigen: How Well Are Men Getting the Message?
Chan et al.
AJPH 2003;93:779-785.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Patient Education for Informed Decision Making About Prostate Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 1-Year Follow-Up
Volk et al.
Ann Fam Med 2003;1:22-28.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Selling sickness: the pharmaceutical industry and disease mongering * Commentary: Medicalisation of risk factors
Moynihan et al.
BMJ 2002;324:886-891.
FULL TEXT  

Seniors' Preferences for Cancer Screening and Medication Use Based on Absolute Risk Reduction
Murphy et al.
Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 2002;57:M100-105.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Health Decision Aids To Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Office Practice
Barry
ANN INTERN MED 2002;136:127-135.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Randomised controlled trial of an interactive multimedia decision aid on hormone replacement therapy in primary care
Murray et al.
BMJ 2001;323:490-490.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer: Update of Early Detection Guidelines for Prostate, Colorectal, and Endometrial Cancers: ALSO: Update 2001--Testing for Early Lung Cancer Detection
Smith et al.
CA Cancer J Clin 2001;51:38-75.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Newborn Hearing Screening Strategies
Kemper and Downs
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000;154:484-488.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Interpretive Review : Feasibility and Effects of Decision Aids
Molenaar et al.
Med Decis Making 2000;20:112-127.
ABSTRACT  

Hospital Informed Consent for Procedure Forms: Facilitating Quality Patient-Physician Interaction
Bottrell et al.
Arch Surg 2000;135:26-33.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

How Should Effectiveness of Risk Communication to Aid Patients' Decisions Be Judged?: A Review of the Literature
Edwards and Elwyn
Med Decis Making 1999;19:428-434.
ABSTRACT  

Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review
O'Connor et al.
BMJ 1999;319:731-734.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Potential Benefits of Decision Aids in Clinical Medicine
Edwards and Elwyn
JAMA 1999;282:779-780.
FULL TEXT  

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening
Volk et al.
Arch Fam Med 1999;8:333-340.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: XVII. How to Use Guidelines and Recommendations About Screening
Barratt et al.
JAMA 1999;281:2029-2034.
FULL TEXT  

Referral for ‘prostatism': developing a ‘performance indicator' for the threshold between primary and secondary care?
Elwyn et al.
Fam Pract 1999;16:140-142.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Talking With Patients About Screening for Prostate Cancer
Rosenthal et al.
JAMA 1999;281:133-133.
FULL TEXT  

Decision Aids for Patients Considering Options Affecting Cancer Outcomes: Evidence of Efficacy and Policy Implications
O'Connor et al.
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999;1999:67-80.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

So many precious stories: a reflective narrative of patient based medicine in general practice, Christmas 1996
Elwyn
BMJ 1997;315:1659-1663.
FULL TEXT  

Determinants of Prostate-Specific Antigen Test Use in Prostate Cancer Screening by Primary Care Physicians
Austin et al.
Arch Fam Med 1997;6:453-458.
ABSTRACT  

Should we screen for prostate cancer?
Woolf
BMJ 1997;314:989-989.
FULL TEXT  

INFORMED CONSENT FOR PSA SCREENING
JWatch General 1996;1996:4-4.
FULL TEXT  

Informed Consent: From Bodily Invasion to the Seemingly Mundane
Ubel
Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1262-1263.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1996 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.