title: A preliminary exploration of the feasibility of offering men information about potential prostate cancer treatment options before they know their biopsy results.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  A small pre-test study was conducted to ascertain potential harm and anxiety associated with distributing information about possible cancer treatment options at the time of biopsy, prior to knowledge about a definitive cancer diagnosis. Priming men about the availability of multiple options before they have a confirmed diagnosis may be an opportunity to engage patients in more informed decision-making.
  
  
  METHODS
  Men with an elevated PSA test or suspicious Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) who were referred to a urology clinic for a biopsy were randomized to receive either the clinic's usual care (UC) biopsy instruction sheet (n = 11) or a pre-biopsy educational (ED) packet containing the biopsy instruction sheet along with a booklet about the biopsy procedure and a prostate cancer treatment decision aid originally written for newly diagnosed men that described in detail possible treatment options (n = 18).
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 62% of men who were approached agreed to be randomized, and 83% of the ED group confirmed they used the materials. Anxiety scores were similar for both groups while awaiting the biopsy procedure, with anxiety scores trending lower in the ED group: 41.2 on a prostate-specific anxiety instrument compared to 51.7 in the UC group (p = 0.13). ED participants reported better overall quality of life while awaiting biopsy compared to the UC group (76.4 vs. 48.5, p = 0.01). The small number of men in the ED group who went on to be diagnosed with cancer reported being better informed about the risks and side effects of each option compared to men diagnosed with cancer in the UC group (p = 0.07). In qualitative discussions, men generally reported they found the pre-biopsy materials to be helpful and indicated having information about possible treatment options reduced their anxiety. However, 2 of 18 men reported they did not want to think about treatment options until after they knew their biopsy results.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this small sample offering pre-biopsy education about potential treatment options was generally well received by patients, appeared to be beneficial to men who went on to be diagnosed, and did not appear to increase anxiety unnecessarily among those who had a negative biopsy.
authors: Northwest HSR&D Center of Excellence, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Metropolitan Park West, 1100 Olive Way #1400, Seattle, WA 98101, USA. szeliadt@uw.edu
authors: Steven B
authors: SB
authors: Zeliadt
authors: Peggy A
authors: PA
authors: Hannon
authors: Ranak B
authors: RB
authors: Trivedi
authors: Laura M
authors: LM
authors: Bonner
authors: Thuy T
authors: TT
authors: Vu
authors: Carol
authors: C
authors: Simons
authors: Crystal A
authors: CA
authors: Kimmie
authors: Elaine Y
authors: EY
authors: Hu
authors: Chris
authors: C
authors: Zipperer
authors: Daniel W
authors: DW
authors: Lin
mesh_terms: D000223:Adaptation, Psychological; D000368:Aged; D003657:Decision Making; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology* / Q000523:psychology / Q000628:therapy*; D011788:Quality of Life
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Feb;24(2):252-5
references: 19089501
references: Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Dec;77(3):404-12
references: 19892508
references: Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun;42(3 Pt 1):1235-56
references: 17489912
references: N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 20;358(12):1250-61
references: 18354103
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Mar 16;103(6):520-3
references: 21357307
references: J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 20;27(6):974-85
references: 19124808
references: Cancer. 2003 Jun 1;97(11):2910-8
references: 12767107
references: Patient Educ Couns. 2004 Aug;54(2):143-52
references: 15288907
references: CA Cancer J Clin. 2010 Mar-Apr;60(2):70-98
references: 20200110
references: Med Decis Making. 2009 Jul-Aug;29(4):409-11
references: 19633270
references: Can J Nurs Res. 1997 Fall;29(3):21-43
references: 9505581
references: Med Care. 2006 Dec;44(12):1137-41
references: 17122719
references: Fam Med. 1993 Jun;25(6):391-5
references: 8349060
references: Urology. 2009 Sep;74(3):509-15
references: 19589564
references: Health Psychol. 2005 Jul;24(4S):S23-8
references: 16045414
references: BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 Jul 16;10:67
references: 20637084
references: CA Cancer J Clin. 2009 Nov-Dec;59(6):379-90
references: 19841280
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 Sep 15;96(18):1358-67
references: 15367568
references: Cancer Nurs. 1997 Jun;20(3):187-96
references: 9190093
references: Am J Crit Care. 2011 Mar;20(2):146-52
references: 20378777
references: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2004;(33):78-101
references: 15504921
references: Ann Intern Med. 2008 Mar 18;148(6):435-48
references: 18252677
references: J Affect Disord. 2009 Apr;114(1-3):163-73
references: 18752852
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 08;(3):CD001431
references: 19588325
references: Cancer Nurs. 2007 Sep-Oct;30(5):E7-15
references: 17876177
references: Am J Manag Care. 2010 May 01;16(5):e121-30
references: 20455638
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Feb 1;70(2):442-8
references: 17765404
references: Cancer. 2006 May 1;106(9):1865-74
references: 16568450