The assertion that vasectomy may be a contributing factor to prostate cancer has alarmed the majority of Americans. If this claim is not explained, men may opt for another form of contraception that may or may not be effective. Because of its high effectiveness in birth control, nearly 45 percent of American men prefer vasectomy to other forms of male contraception (Siddiqui et al., 2014). As a result, the government and other population control agencies are concerned about the impact of vasectomy on the risk of prostate cancer and are seeking information from healthcare professionals and responsible scholars on the subject. Siddiqui et al. in this regard conducted a research on the issue of vasectomy and increased risk of prostate cancer to provide information to the interested parties and also contribute to the body of knowledge.
The information provided in Siddiqui et al’s research article is important to the reader in the following way: it informs about the current statistics of the male population in the U.S that has undergone vasectomy; this influences the reader’s choice of male contraception. The research provides statistical information on individuals that are vasectomized and infected with prostate cancer. Also, it provides general knowledge to the U.S population about vasectomy and its efficiency in population control.
The aim of the study is to provide information globally on the effect of vasectomy on the risk of contracting prostate cancer; this will enable men to make informed decisions when selecting the method as a birth control measure.
The study was aimed at answering the following questions: does vasectomy increase the risk of men contracting prostate cancer? What population of vasectomized individuals in the U.S is diagnosed with prostate cancer? Also, it aimed at answering whether the suspected increase of prostate cancer with vasectomy is determined by differences in sexual hormones and cancer treatment? The research questions are related to the purpose of the study in the sense they are about vasectomy and the U.S male population.
The study utilized a follow-up design where patients suffering from prostate cancer were observed for 24 years. The study was commenced in 1984 with about 6, 023 participants. The sample increased gradually to 12, 321 men. The participants were informed about the purpose of the study and its benefits in the society and their personal lives. Healthcare professionals collected the research data through examining the participants whether they have undergone a vasectomy. Also, the participants were given questionnaires in which they stated whether they were vasectomized. The researcher used the follow-up study method due to the long period and since participants were allowed to join at any point of the study. The NVivo data analysis software was used to compile and analyze the collected data for accuracy during the drawing of conclusions.
In addition to the data analysis software applied in the study, the researcher was able to keep a paper trail of the events that took place during data collection; this trail included the patient behavior, willingness to participate in the study and the results of vasectomy and prostate cancer tests. Also, the responded questionnaires were kept in the healthcare facility as an additional document for reference and comparison during data analysis. The researcher employed certain strategies to minimize instances of biased conclusions: for instance, a team of data analysis experts was used in compiling the information and data. The researcher used participants from different social economic backgrounds. Also, the participant age accommodated most men in the society that are prone to prostate cancer and have the need for a vasectomy.
The research results were as follows: vasectomy slightly increased the risk of prostate cancer; however, it did not have an impact on the risk of localized disease. Also, it was found that the effect of vasectomy was not dependent on the level or type of the patient sex hormones or cancer treatment. These results provide a representation of the reality since the study covered a significant population of the U.S citizens and the statistical data is accurately stated. The prolonged period of study and the strategies employed in ensuring the results are not biased enable me and other readers to have confidence in the analysis process and the entire findings.
Other factors proving the reality of the study results include the current statistics suggesting that about 26.5% of prostate cancer patients in the U.S are vasectomized; this is statistically close to the 25% stated in the study (Pernar et al., 2017). Also, there have been other studies on the topic with correlated results; this gives me confidence in the study findings.
The study had limitations that reduce the accuracy of the findings: for instance, the study period was long; this could result in loss of data especially that documented in questionnaires. Also, during transfer of the information from the questionnaires to the analysis software, some data may have been omitted or duplicated accidentally. Also, some participants may have experienced language problems; this significantly influenced their responses to the questionnaire.
The results were presented in a coherent logic manner in the sense that they are interpreted and their impact on prostate cancer stated. The results can be applied in the field of nursing in the following ways: the nurses can use the information that vasectomy increases chances of contracting prostate cancer to guide men that are seeking contraceptives in making informed decisions.
The researcher has identified the need for further studies on the topic since the data collected was susceptible to many errors. The current technology can enable researchers to keep an accurate record of participant data. Additionally, a different research design can be applied to investigate the issue from a different perspective.
An Institution of Review Board approved the research before its publication and consideration as a scholarly nursing resource. The approval process involved analyzing the relevance of the research information to the current society. The language used and the accuracy of statistical figures was assessed. Also, it was compared to the existing body of knowledge. Its approval, therefore, made it a reference resource that showed the correlation between prostate cancer and vasectomy.
Patient privacy was protected through methods such as they were not supposed to indicate their private information such as the name, or identification number when filling the questionnaire. Instead, they indicated their age for justification that they were between 40 and 75 years old. The researchers provided information to the patients on treatment options available for prostate cancer after complying with the study process.
The research was conducted with the aim of providing information whether vasectomy increased the risk of contracting prostate cancer. The research methods are clearly described and results stated correctly to provide answers to the study questions. The research information provides information that is relevant to the nursing theory and can be applied to improving patient care. Reading the research also provides the knowledge that vasectomy increases the risk of contracting prostate cancer.
Pernar, C. H., Downer, M. K., Wilson, K. M., & Stampfer, M. J. (2017). Vasectomy and Risk of Prostate Cancer: How to Weigh Current Evidence.
Siddiqui, M. M., Wilson, K. M., Epstein, M. M., Rider, J. R., Martin, N. E., Stampfer, M. J., … & Mucci, L. A. (2014). Vasectomy and risk of aggressive prostate cancer: a 24-year follow-up study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 32(27), 3033-3038.