MP55-17 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROSTATE CANCER AND COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING: HOW IMPORTANT IS SHARED DECISION-MAKING?

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP55-17 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROSTATE CANCER AND COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING: HOW IMPORTANT IS SHARED DECISION-MAKING? Borivoj Golijanin, Vikas Bhatt, Alexander Homer, and Elias Hyams Borivoj GolijaninBorivoj Golijanin More articles by this author , Vikas BhattVikas Bhatt More articles by this author , Alexander HomerAlexander Homer More articles by this author , and Elias HyamsElias Hyams More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003308.17AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: While guidelines require shared decision-making (SDM) prior to PSA screening, there are more categorical recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in persons aged 50-75.Historically, though, patients have been more likely to pursue PSA vs CRC, despite more equivocal recommendations for the former and stronger evidence for the latter.Recently, COVID-19 altered access to and patients’ perceptions of healthcare services. This study investigates the relationship between PSA screening, CRC screening, and SDM, with the hypothesis that SDM is associated with higher rates of both screening practices. METHODS: The 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) annual survey report was assessed for male patients between the ages of 50 and 75. The identified patients were further eliminated based on response availability: history of PSA and CRC screening must have been provided. Univariate logistic regression was used for predictor selection and multivariate logistic regression models were generated to assess associations between socioeconomic factors that influenced SDM for PSA screening as well as screening practices themselves. RESULTS: 38,617 men between the ages of 50 and 75 met the inclusion criteria. 44% of respondents had PSA screening, 72.2% CRC screening, 38.83% had both, and 22.67% had neither. 45.2% had discussions about PSA advantages and 22.1% had discussions about PSA disadvantages. Odds of CRC screening increased if the patients had PSA screening (OR 2.52, CI 2.43 – 2.6), and if they had discussion on the advantages (OR 1.23, CI 1.09 – 1.38) and the disadvantages (OR 1.23, CI 1.13 – 1.34). Odds of PSA screening increased if the patient had CRC screening (OR 1.48, CI 1.37 – 1.58), had a discussion of the advantages of PSA testing (OR 2.06, CI 1.91 – 2.21), and when the PSA test was recommended (OR 3.95, CI 3.84 – 4.06). Odds of PSA screening decreased when the disadvantages of PSA were discussed (OR 0.84, CI 0.74-0.95). The Northeast had higher odds of PSA screening (OR 1.29, 1.16-1.41) but lower odds of CRC screening (0.68, CI 0.58-0.77) compared to the West. There were no significant associations with being from the Midwest or South and history of PSA or CRC screening. CONCLUSIONS: There are higher rates of CRC vs PSA screening in a contemporary cohort of patients in men aged 50-75. PSA screening has decreased amid fluctuating guidelines in an era of SDM, and in the post-COVID environment. SDM is associated with both screening practices, and may serve as a metric for quality of care across cancer types. Source of Funding: None. © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e770 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Borivoj Golijanin More articles by this author Vikas Bhatt More articles by this author Alexander Homer More articles by this author Elias Hyams More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...