Factors that influence clinicians’ decisions to decrease active surveillance monitoring frequency or transition to watchful waiting for localised prostate cancer: a qualitative study

• Published in: BMJ open 2021-11, Vol.11 (11), p.e048347-e048347
• Main Authors: Lowenstein, Lisa M, Choi, Noah J, Hoffman, Karen E, Volk, Robert J, Loeb, Stacy
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biopsy; Data collection; Decision making; genitourinary medicine; geriatric medicine; Health Services Research; Humans; Interviews; Life Expectancy; Male; Oncology; Patients; Prostate cancer; Prostatic Neoplasms - therapy; Qualitative Research; quality in health care; Radiation; Surveillance; urological tumours; Urologists; Urology; Watchful Waiting
• ISSN: 2044-6055; 2044-6055
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048347

ObjectiveLittle is known about clinicians’ decision-making about decreasing active surveillance (AS) testing/converting patients to watchful waiting (WW), nor are there any guidelines. The objective of this study was to identify factors that clinicians consider when decreasing AS testing/converting to WW for men with prostate cancer.DesignExploratory qualitative study.SettingAll participants practiced in various institutions in the USA.ParticipantsEligible clinicians had to provide clinical care for patients with prostate cancer in the USA and speak English. Clinicians could be either urologists or radiation oncologists. Of the 24 clinicians, 83% were urologists representing 11 states, 92% were men and 62% were white.MethodsThis qualitative study used data from semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to ensure geographical variation in the USA. Data collection continued until thematic saturation was achieved. Framework analysis guided coding and identification of themes. Two researchers coded all transcripts independently, met to discuss and reached consensus.ResultsInterviews with clinicians demonstrated that testing or monitoring for AS or transitioning to WW is happening in practice, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Decisions to decrease AS were personalised and tailored to patients’ health status. Life expectancy was the dominant factor that influenced decision, but clinicians were generally hesitant to specify an age when they would decrease AS or transition to WW. Fear that poor adherence could lead to missed progression and concerns about the medico-legal issue of not doing enough were cited as barriers to decreasing AS.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that in certain situations, AS frequency is reduced or transitioned to WW, yet decisions appear to be inconsistent and there are no significant barriers. These findings could inform further areas to explore when drafting recommendations that consider patients’ values and preferences when making decisions about decreasing AS/converting to WW.