'I'm not a chance taker': A mixed methods exploration of factors affecting prostate cancer treatment decision-making

The impact of ethnicity on decisions and decision making in prostate cancer: an integrative review

OBJECTIVES

There are various factors that influence men's treatment decision-making for prostate cancer. However, the evidence has not been synthesized by ethnicity. The aim of this integrative review is to identify studies exploring men's decision-making treatment choices for prostate cancer by ethnicity.

DESIGN

Literature was sought from the British Nursing Database, CINAHL, PsycINFO and PubMed. The inclusion criteria consisted of studies that concerned men from any ethnic background and had received a diagnosis of prostate cancer and treatment decision-making was discussed. 12 papers were included in this review.

RESULTS

The results showed that a combination of external and internal influences affected men's treatment decision-making based on ethnicity. Men from certain ethnic backgrounds opted for certain types of treatment over others depending on their personal contexts which was further divided amongst age, education, and language spoken. Generally, White men were more likely to opt for surgery, with Black and Hispanic men less likely to undergo surgery.

CONCLUSION

In this review, White and Black men stated that their doctors' recommendation was a factor in their treatment decision-making for prostate cancer; however, other men reported that their doctors were less helpful with language representing a barrier. Further UK studies are required.

The Experiences and Perspectives of Persons with Prostate Cancer and Their Partners: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Using Meta-Ethnography

Prostate cancer affects one in nine men, so understanding patients' and their partners experiences is crucial for developing effective treatments. The purpose of this review was to synthesis and report the experiences and views of persons with prostate cancer and their partners.

METHODS

A qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) was conducted following the eMERGe reporting guideline. Six databases were searched for the relevant literature, and the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tool was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

A total of 1372 papers were identified, and 36 met the inclusion criteria. Four themes emerged: quality of life, relationships and dynamics, treatment journey and survivorship and aftercare.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer's impact on patients and partners is significant, requiring comprehensive support, holistic care, tailored assistance, and research into therapies to minimize adverse effects and address emotional distress and relationship strain. Prostate cancer treatment causes physical changes, triggering feelings of loss and grief, and affects coping mechanisms. Drawing on emotional support and education is vital for boosting confidence and resilience, as many patients and partners face fears of recurrence and lifestyle changes, highlighting the need for tailored information and presurgery support.

A Scoping Review of Stigma Related to Prostate Cancer in Black Men

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (CaP) disproportionately affects 1-in-4 Black men and is a stigmatised disease within their communities. Yet, Black men are underrepresented in CaP research concerning stigma, which necessitates a scoping review to map available evidence on this topic to inform future research.

AIMS

To map published literature on stigma related to CaP in Black men to understand their experiences and/or perceptions and identify directions for future research.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted using the five-step framework by Arksey and O'Malley. Studies published in English addressing stigma related to CaP from the perspectives of Black men and/or their families were included. We searched six databases including Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection and Google Scholar, from inception to April 2023. Citation searches were also conducted. Two independent reviewers conducted screening and data extraction. Data was synthesised using descriptive content analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-four eligible studies conducted in the USA, UK, Trinidad and Tobago, South Africa, Cameroon and Canada from 1995 to 2023 were included. A total of 1867 Black men with/without a CaP diagnosis and 145 adult partners were included. Review findings showed a complex intersection of self-stigma, public stigma and structural stigma impacted Black men's perceptions of their masculinity. While men's experiences/perceptions of stigma varied depending on their illness status, there were commonalities in their masculinity concerns (underpinned by stigma), which influenced their attitude towards digital rectal examination, post-treatment side effects and social interactions on CaP. These have implications for public health messaging on CaP within Black communities, as well as patient-provider interactions with the men.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel review highlights the need to pay attention to how CaP is presented to Black men and their communities using avenues and languages that are culturally acceptable and empower them to negotiate self-stigma, public stigma and structural stigma related to CaP. Directions for further research were also identified.

Utilisation and impact of predict prostate on decision-making among clinicians and patients in a specialist tertiary referral centre: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer are faced with the decision of whether to undergo radical treatment. Decision-making aids, such as Predict Prostate, can empower both clinicians and patients to make treatment decisions with personalised information, but their impact on multi-disciplinary team (MDT) decision-making and uptake of radical treatment remains unknown.

Objective

The objective of this study is to assess the utilisation and utility of Predict Prostate in informing treatment decisions for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in Cambridge University Hospitals (CUH) of patients referred to the prostate cancer specialist multi-disciplinary team (pcSMDT) and robotic prostatectomy clinic (ROPD) between September 2019 and August 2021 for consideration of radical prostatectomy (RARP). Data on patient characteristics, use of PredictProstate and management decisions were collected from the Epic electronic medical record (EMR) of 839 patients, of whom 386 had intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Results

The use of Predict Prostate at the pcSMDT increased in the second half of the study period (34.5% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001). The use of Predict Prostate was associated with an increased likelihood of attending ROPD for men with CPG2 prostate cancer (OR = 2.155, 95% CI = 1.158-4.013, p = 0.015) but a reduced likelihood of proceeding with RARP for men with CPG2 (OR = 0.397, 95% CI = 0.209-0.753, p = 0.005) and CPG3 (OR = 0.305, 95% CI = 0.108-0.861, p = 0.025) prostate cancer.

Conclusion

Our study showed that the use of Predict Prostate for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with increased attendance at specialist surgical clinic and a reduced chance of undergoing radical prostate surgery.

Considerations from employed African-American and white prostate cancer survivors on prostate cancer treatment and survivorship: a qualitative analysis

OBJECTIVE

To solicit information/suggestions from prostate cancer survivors to improve survivorship experiences specific to work/workability.

DESIGN

The study employed a qualitative/phenomenological approach. Black/African-American and white prostate cancer survivors who: (1) had prostatectomy or radiation therapy 6-36 months prior, (2) were working for pay within 30 days before having treatment, and (3) expected to be working for pay 6 months later (n = 45) were eligible for this study. Survivors were engaged in 60-to-90-minute structured interviews. Content analysis was used to ascertain prominent themes.

RESULTS

Participants had the following recommendations for survivors: ask about research on treatment options and side effects; speak with other survivors about cancer diagnosis; and inform family/friends and employers about needed accommodations. Considerations for family/friends emphasized the significance of instrumental (e.g. help finding information) and emotional support (e.g. encouragement). Employer/co-worker considerations most often related to work-related accommodations/support and avoiding stigmatization of the survivor. Considerations for healthcare providers commonly included the provision of unbiased, plain-language communication about treatment options and side effects. No major differences existed by race.

CONCLUSIONS

Needs of employed PrCA survivors, regardless of their race or treatment type, are commonly related to their desire for informational, instrumental, and/or emotional support from family/friends, employers/co-workers, and healthcare providers. The requested supports are most often related to the side effects of prostate cancer treatment.

Actual situation of decision-making support from medical staff when cancer patients make treatment choices

Background: We investigated factors involved in decision-making support provided by physicians, nurses, pharmacists and medical and psychiatric social workers involved in cancer care. Materials & methods: A questionnaire survey on decision-making support was conducted. The level of clinician support was classified as 'supporting patients' 'decision-making process regarding cancer treatment', 'no support for patients' 'decision-making process regarding cancer treatment' or 'team-based support for patients' 'decision-making process regarding cancer treatment'. Results: Physicians estimated that 83.7% of patients made a cancer treatment decision within 1 week, but 45.4% of patients had difficulty making a decision. Conclusion: Medical personnel should support patients who have difficulty making decisions, establish a screening method to identify those needing support and develop a system providing decision-making support through interprofessional work.

Decision Regret in Patients with Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Treatment choice for localised prostate cancer remains a significant challenge for patients and clinicians, with uncertainty over decisions potentially leading to conflict and regret. There is a need to further understand the prevalence and prognostic factors of decision regret to improve patient quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To generate the best estimates for the prevalence of significant decision regret localised prostate cancer patients, and to investigate prognostic patient, oncological, and treatment factors associated with regret.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO databases including studies evaluating the prevalence or patient, treatment, or oncological prognostic factors in localised prostate cancer patients. A pooled prevalence of significant regret was calculated with the formal prognostic factor evaluation conducted per factor identified.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Significant decision regret was present in a pooled 20% (95% confidence interval 16-23) of patients across 14 studies and 17883 patients. This was lower in active surveillance (13%), with little difference between those who underwent radiotherapy (19%) and those who underwent prostatectomy (18%). Evaluation of individual prognostic factors demonstrated higher regret in those with poorer post-treatment bowel, sexual, and urinary function; decreased involvement in the decision-making process; and Black ethnicity. However, evidence remains conflicting, with low or moderate certainty of findings.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of men experience decision regret after a localised prostate cancer diagnosis. Monitoring those with increased functional symptoms and improving patient involvement in the decision-making process through education and decision aids may reduce regret.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at how common regret in treatment decisions is after treatment for early-stage prostate cancer and factors linked with this. We found that one in five regret their decision, with those who had experienced side effects or were less involved in the decision-making process more likely to have regret. By addressing these, clinicians could reduce regret and improve quality of life.

Social ecological influences on treatment decision-making in men diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

Individuals diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer (PCa) face a difficult decision between active surveillance (AS) and definitive treatment. We aimed to explore perceived influences on treatment decision-making from the patient and partner's perspectives.

METHODS

Patients (and partners) who met AS criteria and had chosen their treatment were recruited. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted via telephone to explore experiences of diagnosis, impact on patient lifestyle, experiences with physicians, treatment preferences/choice, treatment information understanding and needs, and overall decision-making process. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using Reflexive Thematic Analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four male patients (18 chose AS) and 12 female partners participated. Five themes relating to social-ecological influences on treatment choice were identified: (1) partner support and direct influence on patient treatment choice, (2) patient and partner vicarious experiences may influence treatment decisions, (3) the influence of the patient's life circumstances, (4) disclosing to wider social networks: friends, family, and co-workers, and (5) the importance of a good relationship and experience with physicians. Additionally, two themes were identified relating to information patients and partners received about the treatment options during their decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of individual and social influences on treatment decision-making were reported. Physicians providing treatment recommendations should consider and discuss the patient and partner's existing beliefs and treatment preferences and encourage shared decision-making. Further research on treatment decision-making of partnered and non-partnered PCa patients is required. We recommend research considers social ecological factors across the personal, interpersonal, community, and policy levels.

Supportive care needs of men with prostate cancer: A systematic review update

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is highly prevalent and impacts profoundly on patients' quality of life, leading to a range of supportive care needs.

METHODS

An updated systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative data using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) reporting guidelines, to explore prostate cancer patients' experience of, and need for, supportive care. Five databases (Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Emcare and ASSIA) were searched; extracted data were synthesised using Corbin and Strauss's 'Three Lines of Work' framework.

RESULTS

Searches identified 2091 citations, of which 105 were included. Overarching themes emerged under the headings of illness, everyday life and biographical work. Illness work needs include consistency and continuity of information, tailored to ethnicity, age and sexual orientation. Biographical work focused on a desire to preserve identity in the context of damaging sexual side effects. Everyday life needs centred around exercise and diet support and supportive relationships with partners and peers. Work-related issues were highlighted specifically by younger patients, whereas gay and bisexual men emphasised a lack of specialised support.

CONCLUSION

While demonstrating some overarching needs common to most patients with prostate cancer, this review offers novel insight into the unique experiences and needs of men of different demographic backgrounds, which will enable clinicians to deliver individually tailored supportive care.

Development of the Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework: A Context-Specific Expansion of the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis

BACKGROUND

Over the past 2 decades, numerous decision-making interventions have been developed to guide the prostate cancer (PrCA) treatment choices of patients and families. These interventions are often supported by economic decision frameworks, which do not account for the role of emotions in treatment decisions. In some instances, emotion-driven decisions can override an individual's cognitive evaluation of a decision, leading to unfavorable outcomes such as decision regret.

OBJECTIVES

To produce a Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework based on the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis.

METHODS

The authors reviewed seminal research in emotion and decision-making in an effort to create a context-specific decision framework.

RESULTS

Five variables, not germane to the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis, play prominent roles in PrCA decision-making including age, spirituality, family support, healthcare provider communication, and perception of treatment outcomes. While family support only affects decision outcomes by influencing emotion and cognitive evaluation of a PrCA decision, age, spirituality, and healthcare provider communication can have direct effects on an individual's perception of treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework combines new variables with older models to explain the PrCA treatment decision-making process and elucidate relationships affecting treatment outcomes and survivors' perceptions of these outcomes. The core premise of this model can be applied to other high-risk health decisions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Healthcare providers have the greatest influence on PrCA treatment decision-making. Using a shared decision-making approach, providers should take into account a patient's personal characteristics and values, in addition to clinical presentation, to help patients with treatment decisions.

A constructivist grounded theory study on decision-making for treatment choice among Black African and Black Caribbean prostate cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

Despite Black African (BA) and Black Caribbean (BC) men having a disproportionately high risk (1 in 4) of developing prostate cancer (CaP), there is limited understanding of their decision-making for treatment choice. This study explored decision-making for treatment choice among BA/BC men treated for CaP.

METHODS

Using constructivist grounded theory, face-to-face, Skype and telephone interviews were conducted with 25 Black men (8 BA, 17 BC) recruited in England between October 2016 and March 2018. Data were analysed using constant comparison until saturation was achieved.

RESULTS

Data analysis yielded three broad categories: 'coming to terms with the prostate cancer diagnosis', 'getting empowerment through information-seeking' and 'choosing a treatment option'. Priority for survival substantially motivated BA/BC men to take up radical treatment for their CaP. However, decision-making for a particular treatment option was a more complex process which was shaped by an intersection between biological, behavioural, medical, personal and cultural factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare providers need to consider the complexity of decision-making process for CaP treatment among BA/BC men and tailor cancer care services to reflect cultural sensitivity and person-centredness. This could potentially minimise treatment decision regrets and improve men's psychological wellbeing along the CaP survivorship pathway.

Faith as a Mechanism for Health Promotion among Rural African American Prostate Cancer Survivors: A Qualitative Examination

Conceptualized using critical race theory as a theoretical underpinning, this study analyzed the lived experiences of older, rural, African American male prostate cancer (hereafter referenced as PrCA) survivors' faith and health promotion practices within Northeast Louisiana. Qualitative data from journaling, observations, and semi-structured interviews were obtained from ten older, African American male PrCA survivors residing in four rural parishes of Louisiana. The data analysis employed a two-stage approach known as Polkinghorne's analysis of narratives and narrative analysis using an art-based methodological approach. Framed as composite character counterstories, survivors' narratives revealed how survivors made sense of and gave meaning to their PrCA diagnosis, treatment, recovery, and survivorship. Specifically, their counterstories indicate that centering and honoring the unique and often taken-for-granted perspectives of older, rural, African American male PrCA survivors offered a deeper understanding of the multiple factors influencing their quality of life, as well as the sociostructural mechanisms impacting their survivorship care. Faith was examined as both a secular and sacred source of support that these men viewed as central to the acceptance of their diagnosis, treatment, recovery, and survivorship.

Patient perceptions and preferences about prostate fiducial markers and ultrasound motion monitoring procedures in radiation therapy treatment

INTRODUCTION

Patient experiences and preferences of image-guidance procedures in prostate cancer radiotherapy are largely unknown. This study explored experiences and preferences of patients undergoing both fiducial marker (FM) insertion and Clarity ultrasound (US) procedures.

METHODS

A sequential explanatory mixed method approach was used. A questionnaire (n = 40) ranked experiences from 0 to 10 (worst) in the domains of invasiveness; pain; physical discomfort; and psychological discomfort. Responses were analysed with descriptive and inferential statistics. Semi-structured interviews (n = 22) obtained further insights into their perspectives and preferences and were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Perceptions of invasiveness varied with 46% reporting FMs more invasive than US and 49% the same for the two procedures. The mean score for FM was 3.6 and 2.1 for US. Mean scores for pain, physical and psychological discomfort were higher for FMs with 3.3, 3.2 and 2.9, respectively, and 1.1, 1.2 and 1.7 respectively for US, only pain achieved significance (P < 0.05). Three themes emerged from the interviews: Expectations versus Experience; Preferences linked to Priorities; and Motivations. Eleven patients (50%) preferred US; however, 10 (45%) could not illicit a preference.

CONCLUSION

Participants found both of the FM and US image-guidance procedures tolerable and acceptable. Men's preference was elusive, suggesting a more rigorous preference methodology is required to understand preferences in this population.