Patient-Centered Preference Assessment to Improve Satisfaction With Care Among Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer

13 Mar, 2019 ,
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Source
Journal of Clinical Oncology
13 Mar, 2019 ,

This is a randomized controlled trial to study the effectiveness of the Patient Preferences for Prostate Cancer Care (PreProCare) intervention in improving the primary outcome of satisfaction with care and secondary outcomes of satisfaction with the decision, decision regret, and treatment choice among patients with localized prostate cancer.

 

Source
Full content

PURPOSE
To study the effectiveness of the Patient Preferences for Prostate Cancer Care (PreProCare) intervention in improving the primary outcome of satisfaction with care and secondary outcomes of satisfaction with the decision, decision regret, and treatment choice among patients with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS
In this multicenter randomized controlled study, we randomly assigned patients with localized prostate cancer to the PreProCare intervention or usual care. Outcomes were satisfaction with care, satisfaction with the decision, decision regret, and treatment choice. Assessments were performed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and were analyzed using repeated measures. We compared treatment choice across intervention groups by prostate cancer risk categories.

RESULTS
Between January 2014 and March 2015, 743 patients with localized prostate cancer were recruited and randomly assigned to receive PreProCare (n = 372) or usual care (n = 371). For the general satisfaction subscale, improvement at 24 months from baseline was significantly different between groups (P < .001). For the intervention group, mean scores at 24 months improved by 0.44 (SE, 0.06; P < .001) from baseline. This improvement was 0.5 standard deviation, which was clinically significant. The proportion reporting satisfaction with the decision and no regret increased over time and was higher for the intervention group, compared with the usual care group at 24 months (P < .05). Among low-risk patients, a higher proportion of the intervention group was receiving active surveillance, compared with the usual care group (P < .001).

CONCLUSION
Our patient-centered PreProCare intervention improved satisfaction with care, satisfaction with the decision, reduced regrets, and aligned treatment choice with risk category. The majority of our participants had a high income, with implications for generalizability. Additional studies can evaluate the effectiveness of PreProCare as a mechanism for improving clinical and patient-reported outcomes in different settings.