Back to Journals » Patient Preference and Adherence » Volume 9

Factors that influence patient preferences for prostate cancer management options: a systematic review

Authors Showalter T, Mishra M, Bridges J

Received 22 February 2015

Accepted for publication 29 April 2015

Published 2 July 2015 Volume 2015:9 Pages 899—911

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S83333

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 4

Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen

Video abstract presented by TN Showalter

Views: 60

Timothy N Showalter,1 Mark V Mishra,2 John FP Bridges3

1
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA; 2Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 3Department of Health Care Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

Purpose: We performed a systematic review to evaluate evidence regarding factors that influence patient preferences for management options for localized prostate cancer.
Methods: We followed a prespecified search protocol (PROSPERO identifier CRD42014009173) to identify studies that evaluated patient preferences for prostate cancer management options for localized prostate cancer. We queried PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) Plus, and Econ-Lit databases. Two separate reviewers completed the article selection process and review, including coding of study characteristics. Study quality was scored according to the PREFS checklist, which consists of five criteria: Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, and Significance. Reviewers summarized the primary findings of each article included in the analysis.
Results: Of the 606 citations identified in the literature search, there were a total of 21 articles that met all selection criteria, reporting results for a total of 4,131 subjects. Themes identified in the studies included: the importance of patient perceptions of treatment efficacy and side effects; the influence of physician recommendations on patient decision-making; and the prioritization of concerns regarding treatment side effects among those men who prefer radiation therapy or active surveillance. The articles had an average PREFS score of 3.4 (standard deviation [SD] 1.0), which is similar to a recent study for breast cancer treatment preferences.
Conclusion: This systematic review of factors that influence patient preferences for prostate cancer management options identified a small, but high quality, group of articles that satisfied the selection criteria. The available evidence suggests that interventions aimed at informing patients regarding the comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer management alternatives should include the influence of physician recommendations and family members’ desires on patient decision-making.

Keywords: prostate cancer, treatment, decision making, preferences, patient

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Readers of this article also read:

The optimal choice of medication administration route regarding intravenous, intramuscular, and subcutaneous injection

Jin JF, Zhu LL, Chen M, Xu HM, Wang HF, Feng XQ, Zhu XP, Zhou Q

Patient Preference and Adherence 2015, 9:923-942

Published Date: 2 July 2015

Quetiapine for acute bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Suttajit S, Srisurapanont M, Maneeton N, Maneeton B

Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2014, 8:827-838

Published Date: 25 June 2014

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010