国际标准期刊号: 2471-9846

社区与公共卫生护理杂志

开放获取

我们集团组织了 3000 多个全球系列会议 每年在美国、欧洲和美国举办的活动亚洲得到 1000 多个科学协会的支持 并出版了 700+ 开放获取期刊包含超过50000名知名人士、知名科学家担任编委会成员。

开放获取期刊获得更多读者和引用
700 种期刊 15,000,000 名读者 每份期刊 获得 25,000 多名读者

抽象的

Improving Early Prostate Cancer Screenings in African American Men

Richard W and Mellisa H

Introduction: African-American Men (AAM) have a high incidence of morbidity and mortality related to prostate cancer (PrCa). The rate of incidence for AAM developing PrCa is 60% higher and the mortality rate is 2-3 times higher than Caucasian men. The outcome goal of this PrCa health promotion project was to improve discussions about PrCa screenings between the healthcare provider and participants during a shared decision-making exchange.

Method: Databases from 2009-2016 and 2004 were accessed to perform literature review on PrCa screenings for AAM. Inclusion criteria included age 45-65, English speaking, and scholarly journals. Articles included CINAHL, MEDLINE, Proquest Health and Medical Complete, and the Cochrane Library. A pretest was administered to AAM, 45 years and older, to determine baseline knowledge of PrCa. An educational intervention regarding PrCa/screenings (brochure and tip sheet) was provided to the intervention group. A posttest was administered to parish participants to determine outcomes. An evaluation form was provided at the end of the sessions to determine if participates planned to discuss PrCa screenings within the next 6 months with a healthcare provider following the study.

Results:  Pretest mean to determine baseline knowledge about PrCa was 71.988 (SD=12.086), posttest mean was moderately higher at 82.681 (SD=11.884). Significant paired-samples correlation found, r=0.627, p<0.01, with the results of paired-samples t-test indicating significant differences between pretest and posttest knowledge, t (15)=-4.129, p<0.001.

Conclusion: Results show individuals in the intervention group were likely to discuss PrCa screenings with a healthcare provider within the next six months (81.3%) compared with the control group (35.3%). A significant difference in scores found between pretest and posttest measures, indicating the efficacy of the intervention.