A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Effects of a Patient Decision Aid for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Established in Routine Care: The Randomized Controlled EvEnt-PCA Trial. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background And Objective: Since 2016, >21 000 patients with prostate cancer (PC) used our personalized online decision aid in routine care in Germany. We analyzed the effects of this online decision aid for men with nonmetastatic PC in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods: In the randomized controlled EvEnt-PCA trial, 116 centers performed 1:1 allocation of 1115 patients with nonmetastatic PC to use an online decision aid (intervention = I) or a printed brochure (control = C). The primary outcome was treatment decision after 14 mo. The secondary endpoints were knowledge, acceptance, decisional conflict, physician-patient communication, anxiety and depression, decision regret, and quality of life.

Key Findings And Limitations: With complete data from 1000 patients, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of primary or secondary endpoints. In the intervention group, consultation time was shorter (I: 61 min vs C: 70 min, p = 0.02), and more patients provided a summary of their preparation (I: 76% vs C: 56%, p < 0.001). Life expectancy (I: 53% vs C: 47%, p = 0.03), radiotherapy (I: 90% vs C: 84%, p = 0.005), rehabilitation (I: 69% vs C: 62%, p = 0.02), and psycho-oncology (I: 21% vs C: 16%, p = 0.07) were discussed more frequently in the intervention group. Additionally, more counseling sessions with general practitioners (I: 43% vs C: 35%, p = 0.01) and radiotherapists (I: 24% vs C: 18%, p = 0.03) were held in the intervention group.

Conclusions And Clinical Implications: The use of the online decision aid was associated with structural improvements, for example, significantly shorter doctor-patient consultation time. Our findings suggest stronger guideline adherence in the counseling process and promotion of health literacy. Successful implementation of our online decision aid in routine care can provide an example for solving this key obstacle for shared decision-making.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2025.07.019DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

decision aid
16
randomized controlled
12
online decision
12
prostate cancer
8
routine care
8
controlled event-pca
8
event-pca trial
8
secondary endpoints
8
decision
6
effects patient
4

Similar Publications