Promoting better use of the PSA test in general practice: Randomized controlled trial of educational strategies based on outreach visits and mailout

Background. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer is controversial. Demand for PSA testing is likely to rise in the UK, Australia and other western countries. Primary care needs to develop appropriate strategies to respond to this demand. Objectives. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of educational outreach visits (EOVs) and mailout strategies targeting PSA testing in Australian primary care. Methods. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in general practices in southern Adelaide. The main outcome measures at baseline, 6 months and 12 months post-intervention were PSA testing rates and GP knowledge in key areas relating to prostate cancer and PSA testing. Results. The interventions were able to demonstrate a change in clinical practice. In the 6 months post-intervention, median PSA testing rate in the EOV group was significantly lower than in the postal group, which in turn was significantly lower than the control group (P < 0.001). Statistically significant differences were not, however, maintained in the 6-12 month post-intervention period. The EOV group, at 6 months follow-up, had a significantly greater proportion of 'correct' responses than the control group to questions about prostate cancer treatment effectiveness (P = 0.004) and endorsement of PSA screening by professional bodies (P = 0.041). Conclusions. Primary care has a central role in PSA testing for prostate cancer. Clinical practice in this area is receptive to evidence-based interventions.

Randomized controlled trial of an educational intervention for managing fatigue in women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of a psychoeducational intervention in improving cancer-related fatigue. Patients and Methods This randomized controlled trial involved 109 women commencing adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I or II breast cancer in five chemotherapy treatment centers. Intervention group patients received an individualized fatigue education and support program delivered in the clinic and by phone over three 10- to 20-minute sessions 1 week apart. Instruments included a numeric rating scale assessing confidence with managing fatigue; 11-point numeric rating scales measuring fatigue at worst, average, and best; the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue and Piper Fatigue Scales; the Cancer Self-Efficacy Scale; the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30; and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. For each outcome, separate analyses of covariance of change scores between baseline (T1) and the three follow-up time points (T2, T3, and T4) were conducted, controlling for the variable's corresponding baseline value. Results Compared with the intervention group, mean difference scores between the baseline (T1) and immediate after the test (T2) assessments increased significantly more for the control group for worst and average fatigue, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue, and Piper fatigue severity and interference measures. These differences were not observed between baseline and T3 and T4 assessments. No significant differences were identified for any pre- or post-test change scores for confidence with managing fatigue, cancer self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, or quality of life. Conclusion Preparatory education and support has the potential to assist women to cope with cancer-related fatigue in the short term. However, further research is needed to identify ways to improve the potency and sustainability of psychoeducational interventions for managing cancer-related fatigue.