The influence of distress on knowledge transfer for men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer

The provision of dietary and physical activity advice for men diagnosed with prostate cancer: a qualitative study of the experiences and views of health care professionals, patients and partners

Purpose

To explore the views and experiences of health care professionals (HCPs), men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer and their partners about the provision of advice on diet and physical activity after diagnosis and treatment for localised prostate cancer.

Methods

Semi-structured in-depth interviews with ten HCPs (Consultant Urological Surgeons, Uro-Oncology Clinical Nurse Specialists and Allied Health Professionals: see Table 1) and sixteen men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer and seven of their partners. Data from interviews were thematically analysed using the Framework Approach.

Results

The men and their partners provided differing accounts to the HCPs and sometimes to each other concerning the provision of advice on diet and physical activity. Some men were unable to recall receiving such advice from HCPs. Factors impacting upon advice-giving included the perceived lack of an evidence base to support dietary and physical activity advice and the credibility of advice providers. The timing of advice provision was a contentious issue as some HCPs believed that patients might not be willing to receive dietary and physical activity advice at the time of diagnosis, whilst others viewed this an opportune time to provide behaviour change information. Patients concurred with the latter opinion.

Conclusions

Men and their partners would value nutritional and physical activity advice from their HCP, after a localised prostate cancer diagnosis. Men would prefer to receive this advice at an early stage in their cancer journey and may implement behaviour change if the received advice is clear and evidence-based. HCPs should receive suitable training regarding what information to provide to men and how best to deliver this information.

Spirituality is associated with less treatment regret in men with localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Some patients with prostate cancer regret their treatment choice. Treatment regret is associated with lower physical and mental quality of life. We investigated whether, in men with prostate cancer, spirituality is associated with lower decisional regret 6 months after treatment and whether this is, in part, because men with stronger spiritual beliefs experience lower decisional conflict when they are deciding how to treat their cancer.

METHODS

One thousand ninety three patients with prostate cancer (84% white, 10% black, and 6% Hispanic; mean age = 63.18; SD = 7.75) completed measures of spiritual beliefs and decisional conflict after diagnosis and decisional regret 6 months after treatment. We used multivariable linear regression to test whether there is an association between spirituality and decisional regret and structural equation modeling to test whether decisional conflict mediated this relationship.

RESULTS

Stronger spiritual beliefs were associated with less decisional regret (b = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.53, -0.26, P < .001, partial η²  = 0.024, confidence interval = -0.55, 39%, P < .001, partial η²  = 0.03), after controlling for covariates. Decisional conflict partially (38%) mediated the effect of spirituality on regret (indirect effect: b = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.21, -0.12, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Spirituality may help men feel less conflicted about their cancer treatment decisions and ultimately experience less decisional regret. Psychosocial support post-diagnosis could include clarification of spiritual values and opportunities to reappraise the treatment decision-making challenge in light of these beliefs.

What Is a "Good" Treatment Decision? Decisional Control, Knowledge, Treatment Decision Making, and Quality of Life in Men with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

We explored whether active patient involvement in decision making and greater patient knowledge are associated with better treatment decision-making experiences and better quality of life (QOL) among men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Localized prostate cancer treatment decision making is an advantageous model for studying patient treatment decision-making dynamics because there are multiple treatment options and a lack of empirical evidence to recommend one over the other; consequently, it is recommended that patients be fully involved in making the decision.

METHODS

Men with newly diagnosed clinically localized prostate cancer (N = 1529) completed measures of decisional control, prostate cancer knowledge, and decision-making experiences (decisional conflict and decision-making satisfaction and difficulty) shortly after they made their treatment decision. Prostate cancer-specific QOL was assessed at 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

More active involvement in decision making and greater knowledge were associated with lower decisional conflict and higher decision-making satisfaction but greater decision-making difficulty. An interaction between decisional control and knowledge revealed that greater knowledge was only associated with greater difficulty for men actively involved in making the decision (67% of sample). Greater knowledge, but not decisional control, predicted better QOL 6 months after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Although men who are actively involved in decision making and more knowledgeable may make more informed decisions, they could benefit from decisional support (e.g., decision-making aids, emotional support from providers, strategies for reducing emotional distress) to make the process easier. Men who were more knowledgeable about prostate cancer and treatment side effects at the time that they made their treatment decision may have appraised their QOL as higher because they had realistic expectations about side effects.

Knowledge, attitudes and decision-making preferences of men considering participation in the TROG RAVES Prostate Cancer Trial (TROG 08.03)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The RAVES (Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 08.03) randomised controlled trial (RCT), compares adjuvant radiotherapy with early salvage radiotherapy in men with high risk histopathological features at prostatectomy. The RAVES Decision Aid study evaluates the utility of a decision aid for men considering participation in the RAVES RCT. We report the RAVES Decision Aid study participants' attitudes and knowledge regarding RCTs, decision-making preferences and decisional-conflict.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Baseline questionnaires assessed knowledge and attitudes towards RCTs and RAVES RCT. Sociodemographic and clinical predictors of knowledge were examined. Involvement in decision-making and difficulties with the decision-making process were assessed using validated tools.

RESULTS

127 men (median age=63years) were recruited through urologists (n=91) and radiation oncologists (n=36). Men preferred collaborative (35%) or semi-active (35%) decision-making roles. Most (>75%) felt the RAVES RCT was worthwhile and important with participation being wise. However, nearly half had high decisional-conflict regarding participation. Scores of objective knowledge regarding RCTs and RAVES RCT were low.

CONCLUSIONS

Most men with high-risk histopathological features at prostatectomy desire active involvement in decision-making regarding further management. Despite positive attitudes towards RCTs and the RAVES RCT, there were gaps in knowledge and high decisional-conflict surrounding participation.

Knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy as predictors of preparedness for oncology clinical trials: a mediational model

OBJECTIVE

This study used the Ottawa Decision Support Framework to evaluate a model examining associations between clinical trial knowledge, attitudinal barriers to participating in clinical trials, clinical trial self-efficacy, and clinical trial preparedness among 1256 cancer patients seen for their first outpatient consultation at a cancer center. As an exploratory aim, moderator effects for gender, race/ethnicity, education, and metastatic status on associations in the model were evaluated.

METHODS

. Patients completed measures of cancer clinical trial knowledge, attitudinal barriers, self-efficacy, and preparedness. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was conducted to evaluate whether self-efficacy mediated the association between knowledge and barriers with preparedness.

RESULTS

. The SEM explained 26% of the variance in cancer clinical trial preparedness. Self-efficacy mediated the associations between attitudinal barriers and preparedness, but self-efficacy did not mediate the knowledge-preparedness relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

. Findings partially support the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and suggest that assessing patients' level of self-efficacy may be just as important as evaluating their knowledge and attitudes about cancer clinical trials.