Entscheidungshilfen für Patienten finden bei deutschen Urologen breite Akzeptanz

• Verfasst von: Groeben, Christer [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Ihrig, Andreas [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Huber, Johannes [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Entscheidungshilfen für Patienten finden bei deutschen Urologen breite Akzeptanz
• Titelzusatz: Umfrage unter Mitgliedern von DGU und BDU
• Paralleltitel: Decision aids for patients are widely accepted by German urologists
• Paralleltitelzusatz: a survey among members of the German Society of Urology (DGU) and the Federation of German Urologists (BDU)
• Verf.angabe: C. Groeben, M. Baunacke, A. Borkowetz, S. Kliesch, C. Wülfing, A. Ihrig, J. Huber
• E-Jahr: 2016
• Jahr: 11. März 2016
• Umfang: 8 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 10.04.2019
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Der Urologe
• Ort Quelle: [Berlin : Springer Medizin, 2005
• Jahr Quelle: 2016
• Band/Heft Quelle: 55(2016), 6, Seite 784-791
• DOI: doi:10.1007/s00120-016-0054-0
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: ger
• Sach-SW: Decision aids
• Sach-SW: Entscheidungshilfe
• Sach-SW: Geteilte Entscheidungsfindung
• Sach-SW: Health services research
• Sach-SW: Shared decision making
• Sach-SW: Survey
• Sach-SW: Umfrage
• Sach-SW: Urologic oncology
• Sach-SW: Uroonkologie
• Sach-SW: Versorgungsforschung
• K10plus-PPN: 1663097178

Abstract

BackgroundTreatment decision making remains a complex task for localized prostate cancer. Decision aids for patients can support the medical consultation. However, it is not known if German urologists accept decision aids for patients. Comparative data exist from a current survey among american urologists and radio oncologists.Materials and MethodsFrom October through November 2014 we conducted an online survey consisting of 11 multiple-choice questions and an optional free text commentary among the members of DGU and BDU. All data was processed anonymously. We received 464 complete responses for a 6.6 % return rate. For group comparison we applied the Chi2-test.ResultsRespondents’ median age was 50 (range 26-87) years and 15 % were female. 7 % were residents, 31 % employed at a clinic, and 57 % in private practice. Due to the low response rate of younger colleagues the results were not representative for the basic population. Regardless of age (p = 0.2) and professional environment (p = 1) shared decision making was preferred by 89 %. When counseling their patients with localized prostate cancer 20 % relied exclusively on conversation. To support their conversation 63 % used print media, 49 % decision aids, 33 % contact offers to support groups, 24 % Internet resources and 13 % video material. From using decision aids 86 % expected positive effects for patients and 78 % for physicians (p = 0.017). 15 % expected a change of the treatment decision. 77 % would motivate their patients to use a decision aid.ConclusionsIn comparison to the opinion of american urologists and radio oncologists the acceptance of decision aids for patients among German urologists is significantly higher.