You have accessJournal of UrologyGeneral & Epidemiological Trends & Socioeconomics: Practice Patterns, Quality of Life and Shared Decision Making I1 Apr 2017PD06-03 PERSONALIZED DECISION SUPPORT FOR LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER: RESULTS OF A MULTI-SITE RANDOMIZED TRIAL Donna Berry, Fangxin Hong, Traci Blonquist, Barbara Halpenny, Martin Sanda, Viraj Master, Christopher Filson, Peter Rossi, Peter Chang, Gary Chien, Randy Jones, Tracey Krupski, Mitchell Sokoloff, Leslie Wilson, and Seth Wolpin Donna BerryDonna Berry More articles by this author , Fangxin HongFangxin Hong More articles by this author , Traci BlonquistTraci Blonquist More articles by this author , Barbara HalpennyBarbara Halpenny More articles by this author , Martin SandaMartin Sanda More articles by this author , Viraj MasterViraj Master More articles by this author , Christopher FilsonChristopher Filson More articles by this author , Peter RossiPeter Rossi More articles by this author , Peter ChangPeter Chang More articles by this author , Gary ChienGary Chien More articles by this author , Randy JonesRandy Jones More articles by this author , Tracey KrupskiTracey Krupski More articles by this author , Mitchell SokoloffMitchell Sokoloff More articles by this author , Leslie WilsonLeslie Wilson More articles by this author , and Seth WolpinSeth Wolpin More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.365AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Men with new localized prostate cancer (LPC) face a confusing set of care options. The purpose of our trial was to evaluate decisional conflict (DC) after access to decision support, the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P), or usual care (UC). METHODS Men were randomized to P3P+UC or UC alone after responding to a baseline query of influential personal factors. The P3P, a tailored educational/coaching tool, was provided prior to the options review consult at 7 practices across the US. The low literacy DC scale (DCS) was administered at baseline and 1 month. One-month DCS (total score (TS) and 4 subscales) was compared by group using ANCOVA. Factors previously identified as influencing DC (age, education, partner status, working status, income, race, D′Amico risk levels, information resources, baseline/one-month decisional status, baseline DCS and study site) were assessed univariately and then adjusted in multivariable analysis. Backwards model selection was used and two-way interactions checked. RESULTS 392 (198 P3P, 194 UC) men were randomized. 309 (155 P3P, 154 UC) men returned 1 month DCS. No significant study group effect was indicated for the TS or subscales univariately. In multivariable analyses, P3P marginally reduced TS conflict (LSmean=3.19, P=0.06) and significantly reduced conflict related to being informed (LSmean =6.99, P=0.0004). There were significant group interactions with partner status for the TS and income for the informed subscale. Unpartnered P3P users had significantly lower total conflict compared to partnered men in both groups (P=0.0005) and UC unpartnered men (p=0.03). Among low income men, UC had significantly higher conflict on the informed subscale compared to P3P users (P<0.0001) and higher income men in both groups (P<0.0001). Overall, partnered and/or low income men had higher conflict in TS, as well as in 3 subscales. Men undecided at 1-mo had significantly higher conflict in TS and all subscales. Study site significantly impacted the TS, informed and value clarity subscales. Men who were working or used the Internet for information had significantly lower conflict in the value clarity subscale. Low D′Amico risk level was significantly associated with higher uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS The P3P is superior to UC with regard to informing men about LPC options. Our results have implications for who is at risk for greater DC. Men with lowest risk disease, and likely more options, are more uncertain. Men with partners/spouses and low income men are more likely to be conflicted. Decision support for partners is an important next step. © 2017FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 197Issue 4SApril 2017Page: e122 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2017MetricsAuthor Information Donna Berry More articles by this author Fangxin Hong More articles by this author Traci Blonquist More articles by this author Barbara Halpenny More articles by this author Martin Sanda More articles by this author Viraj Master More articles by this author Christopher Filson More articles by this author Peter Rossi More articles by this author Peter Chang More articles by this author Gary Chien More articles by this author Randy Jones More articles by this author Tracey Krupski More articles by this author Mitchell Sokoloff More articles by this author Leslie Wilson More articles by this author Seth Wolpin More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...