Facilitating Shared Decisionmaking About Prostate Cancer Screening
NCT ID: NCT00013247
Last Updated: 2015-04-07
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
1152 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2002-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Evaluating the Effect of a Decision Aid on Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening
NCT01484665
Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening: a Practice-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT00630188
Sexual and Urological Rehabilitation to Men Operated for Prostate Cancer and Their Partners
NCT02103088
Therapy for Erectile Dysfunction Adaptation of ACT for Compliance With an Erectile Rehabilitation Program
NCT01275404
Sexual Dysfunction and Adaptation in Couples Affected by Prostate Cancer Surgery
NCT00335634
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Due to the disputed efficacy of prostate cancer (CaP) screening and treatment, most authorities recommend that providers inform and involve patients in CaP screening decisions.
Objectives:
This study evaluated two interventions designed to facilitate this process.
Methods:
1152 male veterans age 50+ with no CaP and primary care appointments at four VA medical facilities in VISN 23 were randomly assigned to one of three groups: mailed pamphlet intervention, mailed video intervention, or usual care (control). Intervention materials were mailed two weeks prior to a target primary care appointment and patient telephone surveys were conducted one week (T1) and one year (T2) after the target appointment. Outcomes included: a 10- item validated knowledge index; responses to questions on CaP natural history, treatment efficacy, PSA accuracy, and expert disagreement about the PSA; whether screening was discussed with provider; scores on decision information seeking, participation and satisfaction scales; screening and treatment preferences; and PSA testing rates.
Status:
Complete
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
SINGLE_GROUP
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Arm 1
Prostate Cancer Screening Education
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Prostate Cancer Screening Education
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
50 Years
MALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
US Department of Veterans Affairs
FED
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Melissa R. Partin, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Partin MR, Nelson D, Flood AB, Friedemann-Sanchez G, Wilt TJ. Who uses decision aids? Subgroup analyses from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial of two prostate cancer screening decision support interventions. Health Expect. 2006 Sep;9(3):285-95. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00400.x.
Radosevich DM, Partin MR, Nugent S, Nelson D, Flood AB, Holtzman J, Dillon N, Haas M, Wilt TJ. Measuring patient knowledge of the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening. Patient Educ Couns. 2004 Aug;54(2):143-52. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00207-6.
Wilt TJ, Partin MR. Reducing PSAnxiety: The importance of noninvasive chronic disease management in prostate cancer detection and treatment. Am J Med. 2004 Nov 15;117(10):796-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2004.10.002. No abstract available.
Wilt TJ, Partin MR. Prostate cancer intervention. Involving the patient in early detection and treatment. Postgrad Med. 2003 Oct;114(4):43-9; quiz 50. doi: 10.3810/pgm.2003.10.1506.
Partin MR, Nelson D, Radosevich D, Nugent S, Flood AB, Dillon N, Holtzman J, Haas M, Wilt TJ. Randomized trial examining the effect of two prostate cancer screening educational interventions on patient knowledge, preferences, and behaviors. J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Aug;19(8):835-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30047.x.
Taylor BC, Wilt TJ, Clothier B, Grill JP, Partin MR. Assessing health status in older men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS. 2006 Jul 1; 23(7):29-40.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IIR 99-277
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.