The name of the article, in this case, is Accuracy of “PSA Self Reports Among Low-Income Men with Prostate Cancer After a Public Health Nursing Intervention”. This article was published in the source journal, Public Health Nursing (PHN). The authors of the article are; Mary Wassel Zavala (LCSW, MPP, MA), Arthur Yule (BS), Lorna Kwan (MPH), Sylvia Lambrechts (MPH, MA), Sally L. Maliski (RN, Ph.D., FAAN), and Mark S. Litwin (MD, MPH). This article is credible since it provides enough educational statistics, plus the credentials given by the authors are credible. The authors of this article have also published several other research works on health and nursing; therefore, they are trusted individuals in the field of nursing and health care. There is evidence of conflict of interest; the low-income population is not considered; they are bound to be ignored due to their lack of exposure to nursing intervention.
The article was published due to the increased Prostate Cancer cases in men. The National Health Service recommended that all men attend prostate cancer screening. Some men showed no signs of this infection but tested positive for the disease. The main focus of this study is to determine the impact that low income or financial disability has in assessing the accuracy of PSAs in prostate cancer patients. The study focuses on delivering improved care to cancer patients based on the type of treatment facilities they are exposed to. It is evident that the materials only provide little guidance. The article reviewed materials cannot provide any meaningful, evidence-based information to determine the accuracy of our general population. For this reason, there was a recommendation for further extensive research to be conducted on the matter that offers better strategies and methodologies that can accurately reflect the general population.
The problem investigated was an increase in the inaccuracy of PSA self-reports of patients with prostate cancer. The investigation suggested that the inaccuracy found in the data results from poor people not accepting to do interviews and to speak about their cancer problems. Those who find the courage to speak do not give correct information. The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of patient-reported prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels amongst indigent, uninsured men in the state-funded prostate cancer treatment program that provides case management, care coordination, and health education. The plausible theory to be derived from this study is that better medical conditions and constant nursing intervention play a significant role in PSA self-report accuracy.
The design of this study was qualitative analysis; the study included a comparison of different demographic characteristics between patients with accurate knowledge versus patients who had inaccurate self-reported PSA data. Non-linear analysis was further conducted to evaluate the available trends in the self-reported accuracy over the 18 months of the program enrolment. The design of this study is an educational level study. The sample population consisted of 114 patients with lab and self-reported PSAs at the program enrolment during the 18month course period. The sample was adequate as it included all the low earning groups of people known in the United States, including Hispanics and the other minority groups. Also, the intervention of the NCM was included in the provision of patient histories based on all the regular follow-ups conducted on the patients that made the information given clinically correct and adequate. They were selected based on unique characteristics such as ethnicity, which consisted of race, patients’ age, and language. And the type of medical provider consisted of the private versus the public treatment programs. All the analysis was two-sided for accuracy.
The patients enrolled in the program receive education and close monitoring and supervision from the Nurse Case Managers (NCM). The data for this study was collected through Statistical data analysis, and the statistical data analyses used are the We Sampled population and literature reviews. The demographical analysis is the best way to get accurate measures on population logistics.
The study results showed that patients who did not offer many improvements were as follows: 54% were Hispanic, 48% non-English speakers, and 21% had a monthly income that constituted $0.58% of the patients receiving their treatment in public and county-run medical facilities. Based on these statistics, the figures only include the minority groups in the US that are known to receive minimal income. Table 1 showed no significant statistical difference in the treatment variables between the accurate and the inaccurate groups at program enrolment. Figure 1 showed increased accuracy with time advocated ongoing exposure and the nursing interventions. According to the results, the answer to the study question was answered because the findings showed a difference in the provider type. This showed that patients who received nursing intervention during their treatments at private medical facilities showed significant improvements compared to those receiving treatment at the public medical facility due to monetary challenges and limitations based on low incomes.
The sample patients provide both lab and self-reports of PSAs documented within the time frame provided (18months). The patients used were sampled from different groups considered to have the adequate characteristics required in this analysis to provide an accurate evaluation of the situation. Based on the statistics, it was established that half of all the participants used in the trial provided accurate reports on their status. Therefore, based on the statistical evidence provided by the graphical presentations, the results must be valid. Using sample patients assessed and monitored through the enrolment program provides first-hand evidence instead of second-hand surveys. The study pairs every PSA compared the self-reported values with the gold standard lab values and used them to categorize the self-reported values as accurate or inaccurate. The threats to the validity of these findings are the errors in reporting. 61% of the patients have given inaccurate reports on their PSA levels due to different mathematical errors. This could threaten the validity of the whole study. The presented results can accurately be based on the 46% that provided accurate information to a population of less than half the sampled patients.
Based on different research materials, they have shown the clinical importance of post-treatment prostate cancer. Previous studies have also found that low-income disadvantaged men face various barriers, including knowledge, self-efficacy, and treatment. The result will create more awareness to the healthcare sector hence helping reduce the limitations by closing the knowledge gap created by the disadvantage of money in people living with post-treatment prostate cancer.
The results can also be used in the management of post-treatment prostate cancer.
Also, the results can be used by the patients and victims of prostate cancer to provide a more objective indication of their cancer status. Furthermore, the results help to emphasize the importance of providing free or low-cost prostate cancer treatments concerning the disadvantages the high cost has on low-income patients. Using these results, the healthcare sector can be more determined to improve patient self-efficacy and health knowledge using navigation strategies, education, and collective training programs, and creating a community support system that will help eradicate patient ignorance. The findings of the study about the difference in accuracy levels of patients being treated in the private facilities as compared to those being treated in the public facilities will help create awareness in the general clinical practice on the major areas of concerns and hence help create strategies of closing this problem caused by economic gap.
The findings can be used by the clinical practice to help determine the allocation of cancer resources as this group needs special attention when allocating resources. Unfortunately, this oversight has not been considered prior due to this study’s lack of adequate information. This study is based on randomized controlled trials and cannot provide clinical evidence on the issue. It is, however, supported with educational interventions that cannot be accounted for. In addition, all the materials used to analyze the study are reported to provide only limited guidance. Therefore, the strategies provided cannot be used to determine the accuracy of the population, as mentioned earlier. The methodology used in this study is also quite simple, but they incorporated clinical accepted and reviewed research materials. The findings of this research work are all considered vital for men and the health service providers in the fight against prostate cancer in men.
.
Reference
Zavala, M. W., Yule, A., Kwan, L., Lambrechts, S., Maliski, S. L., & Litwin, M. S. (2016). Accuracy of PSA Self‐Reports among Low‐Income Men with Prostate Cancer after a Public Health Nursing Intervention. Public Health Nursing, 33(6), 511-518.