- Title
- Prostate cancer screening in primary health care: the current state of affairs
- Creator
- Ranasinghe, Weranja K. B.; Kim, Simon P.; Lawrentschuk, Nathan; Papa, Nathan P.; Sengupta, Shomik; Frydenberg, Mark; Bolton, Damien; Pond, Dimity; Ried, Karin; Marshall, Melanie J.; Persad, Raj
- Relation
- SpringerPlus Vol. 4, Issue 1
- Publisher Link
- http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0819-8
- Publisher
- SpringerOpen
- Resource Type
- journal article
- Date
- 2015
- Description
- This study aims to examine the current practice of General practitioners (GPs)/primary care physicians in opportunistic screening for prostate cancer (PC) by digital rectal examination(DRE) and Prostate Specific Antigen(PSA) testing and identify any difference in screening practice. Printed copies and/or electronic versions of a survey was distributed amongst 438 GPs throughout Australia in 2012. Statistical analyses (Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Fisher's exact test or Pearson chi-square test)were performed by outcomes and GP characteristics.There were a total of 149 responses received (34%), with similar gender distribution in rural and metropolitan settings. 74% GPs believed PSA testing was at least 'somewhat effective' in reducing PC mortality with annual PSA screening being conducted by more GPs in the metropolitan setting compared to the rural GPs (35% vs 18.4%), while 25% of rural GPs would not advocate routine PSA screening. When examining the concordance between DRE and PSA testing by gender of GP, the male GPs reported performing PSA testing more frequently than DRE in patients between ages 40 to 69 (p = 0.011). Urology Society guidelines (77.2%) and College of GPs (73.2%) recommendations for PC screening were thought to be at least 'somewhat useful'. Although reference ranges for PSA tests were felt to be useful, the majority (65.8%) found it easier to refer to an urologist due to the disagreements in guidelines. In conclusion, the current guidelines for PSA screening appear to cause more confusion due to their conflicting advice, leaving GPs to formulate their own practice methods, calling for an urgent need for uniform collaborative guidelines.
- Subject
- prostate cancer; cancer screening; primary health care; general practitioners
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/1336355
- Identifier
- uon:27599
- Identifier
- ISSN:2193-1801
- Rights
- © 2015 Ranasinghe et al.; licensee Springer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
- Language
- eng
- Full Text
- Reviewed
- Hits: 9645
- Visitors: 10340
- Downloads: 404
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | ATTACHMENT02 | Publisher version (open access) | 442 KB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |