• Margaret Holmes-Rovner, Chrystal Price, David R Rovner, Karen Kelly-Blake, Janet Lillie, Celia Wills, and Vence L Bonham.
• Department of Medicine and Center for Ethics, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. mholmes@msu.edu
• J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Jan 1; 21 (1): 566056-60.

ObjectiveTo use qualitative methods to explore audiotape evidence of unanticipated confusion between benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer in using a videotape BPH treatment decision aid (DA).DesignQualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews and surveys originally collected to study men's interpretation of a DA.Setting And ParticipantsCommunity sample of college and noncollege educated African American and white men (age> or =50; n=188).MeasuresTranscript analysis identified themes in men's comments about BPH and cancer. Surveys measured BPH general and prostate cancer-specific knowledge, literacy (Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults), BPH symptoms, and demographics.ResultsIn transcript analysis, 18/188 men spontaneously talked about BPH and cancer as being related to each other, despite explicit statements to the contrary in the video. Survey data suggest that up to 126/188 men (67%) persisted in misconceptions even after viewing the DA video. Three themes were identified in the transcripts: (1) BPH and cancer are equated, (2) BPH surgery is for the purpose of removing cancer, and (3) BPH leads to cancer.ConclusionsOverall knowledge increases with DA use may mask incorrect theories of disease process. Further research should identify decision support designs and clinical counseling strategies to address persistence of beliefs contrary to new information presented in evidence-based DAs.

16 keywords...

hide…