Disparities in prostate cancer screening practices among general practitioners and urologists (PROSHADE study): A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION: Recent European recommendations promote risk-based, patient-centred screening models that emphasise shared decision-making (SDM) in prostate cancer (PCa) screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Understanding how clinicians apply these practices is essential, particularly given the roles of general practitioners (GPs) and urologists in detection. The aim of this study was to compare the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of GPs and urologists in Spain regarding PSA testing, PCa screening, and SDM implementation. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey conducted via an online questionnaire. Members of the Spanish Association of Urology (AEU) and the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (semFYC) were surveyed online. The survey, developed and validated using a modified Delphi process, contained 18 items assessing clinicians' opinions, practices, and knowledge of guidelines. Data from 494 respondents (280 GPs and 214 urologists) were analysed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression to explore differences between specialty, demographics, and screening practices. RESULTS: Urologists were more likely than GPs to consider PSA testing important (97.2% vs. 83.2%) and useful (96% vs. 44.4%), and to recommend it to relatives (90.4% vs. 44%) (all p < 0.001). They reported to initiate testing earlier (50-59 years: 77.8% vs. 32%) and reported to perform it more frequently (annual testing: 60.7% vs. 45.6%, p < 0.001). GPs reported to more often engaged in SDM when ordering PSA tests (69.7% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). Knowledge of guidelines was higher among urologists (91% vs. 24.1%), yet 75.4% stated that they had not modified practice following updated recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Significant specialty-based differences exist in PSA testing practices, perceptions, and guideline adherence. Urologists show greater familiarity with recommendations, while GPs reported more patient-centred communication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-05-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0349758
Primary Topic
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Disparities in prostate cancer screening practices among general practitioners and urologists (PROSHADE study): A cross-sectional study

Elena Ronda, Maite López‐Garrigós, Luís Prieto, Ignacio Párraga Martínez et al.
PLoS ONE
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Disparities in prostate cancer screening practices among general practitioners and urologists (PROSHADE study): A cross-sectional study

Elena Ronda, Maite López‐Garrigós, Luís Prieto, Ignacio Párraga Martínez, Ana Cebrián, Blanca Lumbreras, Mercedes Guilabert, Mª del Campo-Giménez, Luis Gómez-Pérez, Ildefonso Hernández-Aguado, Juan-Pablo Caballero-Romeu, Lucy A. Parker, Carlos Canelo-Aybar, Irene Moral-Peláez, Pablo Alonso-Coello
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Recent European recommendations promote risk-based, patient-centred screening models that emphasise shared decision-making (SDM) in prostate cancer (PCa) screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Understanding how clinicians apply these practices is essential, particularly given the roles of general practitioners (GPs) and urologists in detection. The aim of this study was to compare the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of GPs and urologists in Spain regarding PSA testing, PCa screening, and SDM implementation. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey conducted via an online questionnaire. Members of the Spanish Association of Urology (AEU) and the Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (semFYC) were surveyed online. The survey, developed and validated using a modified Delphi process, contained 18 items assessing clinicians' opinions, practices, and knowledge of guidelines. Data from 494 respondents (280 GPs and 214 urologists) were analysed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression to explore differences between specialty, demographics, and screening practices. RESULTS: Urologists were more likely than GPs to consider PSA testing important (97.2% vs. 83.2%) and useful (96% vs. 44.4%), and to recommend it to relatives (90.4% vs. 44%) (all p < 0.001). They reported to initiate testing earlier (50-59 years: 77.8% vs. 32%) and reported to perform it more frequently (annual testing: 60.7% vs. 45.6%, p < 0.001). GPs reported to more often engaged in SDM when ordering PSA tests (69.7% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). Knowledge of guidelines was higher among urologists (91% vs. 24.1%), yet 75.4% stated that they had not modified practice following updated recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Significant specialty-based differences exist in PSA testing practices, perceptions, and guideline adherence. Urologists show greater familiarity with recommendations, while GPs reported more patient-centred communication.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(5)
Universitat de Miguel Hernández d'Elx (ES), University of Alicante (ES), Hospital de Sant Pau (ES), Hospital Universitari Sant Joan D'Alacant (ES), Hospital General Universitario de Elche (ES), Hospital General Universitario de Alicante Doctor Balmis (ES), Servicio de Salud de Castilla La Mancha (ES), Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre (ES), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (ES), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL) (ES), University of Castilla-La Mancha (ES)
Instituto de Salud Carlos III
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.