前列腺癌筛查:葡萄牙医生的知识、态度和做法。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Raquel Braga, Samantha Morais, Luís Pacheco-Figueiredo, Natália Araújo, Nuno Lunet
{"title":"前列腺癌筛查:葡萄牙医生的知识、态度和做法。","authors":"Raquel Braga, Samantha Morais, Luís Pacheco-Figueiredo, Natália Araújo, Nuno Lunet","doi":"10.1007/s13187-025-02665-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Opportunistic prostate cancer (PCa) screening is common worldwide, with physicians playing an important role in its uptake and consequences. This study explores the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of family doctors and urologists in Portugal regarding PCa screening. A national online survey was conducted between November 2020 and February 2021. Family doctors and urologists were reached by email through their national medical associations, for a total of 596 and 63 participants from each group, respectively. Urologists considered themselves more updated with PCa screening practices than family doctors (93.0% vs. 73.1%; p < 0.001). Family doctors were more likely to consider older age (97.2% vs. 90.9%; p = 0.025) and smoking (80.6% vs. 31.7%; p < 0.001) as risk factors for PCa. Most urologists reported following the European Association of Urology Guidelines for PCa screening (90.9%), while family doctors preferred the National Guidelines (73.9%). A higher proportion of urologists believed early diagnosis is essential for improving PCa prognosis (92.9% vs. 67.9%; p < 0.001). Urologists were more likely to recommend prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for age group-eligible males (always or almost always: 77.2% vs. 20.4%; p < 0.001) and to perform digital rectal examination (never or rarely: 3.5% vs. 96.2%; p < 0.001). Overall, 65.1% of doctors believed that magnetic resonance imaging could improve the diagnosis of PCa in patients with high PSA levels. Family doctors and urologists differed in their knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding PCa screening. The latter are more interventive and believe more in the benefits of PCa screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prostate Cancer Screening: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices by Medical Doctors in Portugal.\",\"authors\":\"Raquel Braga, Samantha Morais, Luís Pacheco-Figueiredo, Natália Araújo, Nuno Lunet\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13187-025-02665-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Opportunistic prostate cancer (PCa) screening is common worldwide, with physicians playing an important role in its uptake and consequences. This study explores the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of family doctors and urologists in Portugal regarding PCa screening. A national online survey was conducted between November 2020 and February 2021. Family doctors and urologists were reached by email through their national medical associations, for a total of 596 and 63 participants from each group, respectively. Urologists considered themselves more updated with PCa screening practices than family doctors (93.0% vs. 73.1%; p < 0.001). Family doctors were more likely to consider older age (97.2% vs. 90.9%; p = 0.025) and smoking (80.6% vs. 31.7%; p < 0.001) as risk factors for PCa. Most urologists reported following the European Association of Urology Guidelines for PCa screening (90.9%), while family doctors preferred the National Guidelines (73.9%). A higher proportion of urologists believed early diagnosis is essential for improving PCa prognosis (92.9% vs. 67.9%; p < 0.001). Urologists were more likely to recommend prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for age group-eligible males (always or almost always: 77.2% vs. 20.4%; p < 0.001) and to perform digital rectal examination (never or rarely: 3.5% vs. 96.2%; p < 0.001). Overall, 65.1% of doctors believed that magnetic resonance imaging could improve the diagnosis of PCa in patients with high PSA levels. Family doctors and urologists differed in their knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding PCa screening. The latter are more interventive and believe more in the benefits of PCa screening.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02665-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02665-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

机会性前列腺癌(PCa)筛查在世界范围内很常见,医生在其吸收和后果中起着重要作用。本研究探讨了葡萄牙家庭医生和泌尿科医生关于前列腺癌筛查的知识、态度和实践。一项全国在线调查于2020年11月至2021年2月进行。家庭医生和泌尿科医生通过各自的国家医学协会通过电子邮件联系上,每组分别有596名和63名参与者。泌尿科医生认为自己比家庭医生更了解前列腺癌筛查(93.0% vs. 73.1%;p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prostate Cancer Screening: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices by Medical Doctors in Portugal.

Opportunistic prostate cancer (PCa) screening is common worldwide, with physicians playing an important role in its uptake and consequences. This study explores the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of family doctors and urologists in Portugal regarding PCa screening. A national online survey was conducted between November 2020 and February 2021. Family doctors and urologists were reached by email through their national medical associations, for a total of 596 and 63 participants from each group, respectively. Urologists considered themselves more updated with PCa screening practices than family doctors (93.0% vs. 73.1%; p < 0.001). Family doctors were more likely to consider older age (97.2% vs. 90.9%; p = 0.025) and smoking (80.6% vs. 31.7%; p < 0.001) as risk factors for PCa. Most urologists reported following the European Association of Urology Guidelines for PCa screening (90.9%), while family doctors preferred the National Guidelines (73.9%). A higher proportion of urologists believed early diagnosis is essential for improving PCa prognosis (92.9% vs. 67.9%; p < 0.001). Urologists were more likely to recommend prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for age group-eligible males (always or almost always: 77.2% vs. 20.4%; p < 0.001) and to perform digital rectal examination (never or rarely: 3.5% vs. 96.2%; p < 0.001). Overall, 65.1% of doctors believed that magnetic resonance imaging could improve the diagnosis of PCa in patients with high PSA levels. Family doctors and urologists differed in their knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding PCa screening. The latter are more interventive and believe more in the benefits of PCa screening.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cancer Education
Journal of Cancer Education 医学-医学:信息
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
122
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues. Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care. We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts. Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited. Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants. Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信