Skip to main content
Log in

Prostate Cancer Screening—A Physician Survey in Missouri

  • Published:
Journal of Community Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated prostate cancer screening practices using prostate specific antigen testing (PSA), digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) by primary care physicians in Missouri. In 1993, a mail survey was sent to a stratified random sample of 750 physicians whose primary specialty was general practice, family practice, or internal medicine. Three separate mailings resulted in an overall adjusted response rate of 60 percent. Ninety-five percent of physicians were more inclined to use PSA compared with three years previously, with only 45 percent of physicians more inclined to use DRE. An increase in the use of PSA following a negative DRE was reported by 85 percent and a greater inclination to use TRUS following a positive PSA was reported by 90 percent Eighty-six percent agreed with the American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines on prostate cancer screening. Using logistic regression adjusted across levels of demographic and practice factors, prevalence odds ratios were derived with results indicating that agreement with ACS guidelines and being in private practice are strong predictors of a physician's inclination to routinely screen asymptomatic patients for prostate cancer. Our findings have provided baseline information on prostate cancer screening in Missouri and suggest that primary care physicians view PSA testing as a useful procedure and appear to be using it in a manner similar to the general pattern seen across the country.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures-1996. Atlanta, Ga.: American Cancer Society, Inc., 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dorr VJ, Williamson SK, Stephens RL. An evaluation of prostate-specific antigen as a screening test for prostate cancer. Arch Intern Med 1993; 153:2529-2537.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Miller BA, Ries LA, Hankey BF, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review: 1973-1990. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute (NCI) 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: Commentary on the recommendations of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. Am J. Prev Med 1994; 10:187-193.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brownson RC, Remington PL, Davis JR. Chronic Disease Epidemiology and Control. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gohagan JK, Prorok PC, Kramer BS, Hayes RB, Cornett JE. The prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial of the National Cancer Institute. Cancer 1995; 75:1869-1873.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, Trachtenberg J, Pauker SG, Detsky AS. Screening for prostate cancer: a decision analytic view. JAMA 1994; 272:773-780.

    Google Scholar 

  8. U. S. Preventive Services Task Force. Guide to clinical preventive services, 2nd ed. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. Epidemiologic Research: Principles and Quantitative Methods. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold 1982, p 529.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hosmer DW, Taber S, Lemeshow S. The importance of assessing the fit of logistic regression models: a case study. Am J Public Health 1994; 81:1630-1635.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cooner WH, Mosley BR, Rutherford CLJ, et al. Prostate cancer detection in a clinical urological practice by ultrasonography, digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen. J Urol 1990; 143:1146-1152.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Porter AT, Zimmerman J, Ruffin M, et al. Recommendations of the first Michigan conference on prostate cancer. Urology 1996; 48:519-534.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sladden MJ, Dickinson JA. General practitioners' attitudes to screening for prostate and testicular cancers. Med J Aust 1995; 162:410-143.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Guidelines for Preventive Activities in General Practice. 3rd ed. Sydney, Australia: Royal Australian College of General Practitioners 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. The Canadian Guide to Clinical Preventive Health Care. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Canada Communications Group 1994.

  16. Collins MM, Barry MJ. Controversies in prostate cancer screening: analogies to the early lung cancer screening debate. JAMA 1996; 276:1976-1979.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kojima M, Babaian RJ. Algorithms for early detection of prostate cancer. Cancer 1995; 75:1860-1868.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lawson, D.A., Simoes, E.J., Sharp, D. et al. Prostate Cancer Screening—A Physician Survey in Missouri. Journal of Community Health 23, 347–358 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018745821888

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018745821888

Keywords

Navigation