Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Review ArticleSystematic Review

Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Leen Naji, Harkanwal Randhawa, Zahra Sohani, Brittany Dennis, Deanna Lautenbach, Owen Kavanagh, Monica Bawor, Laura Banfield and Jason Profetto
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2018, 16 (2) 149-154; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2205
Leen Naji
1Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Harkanwal Randhawa
2Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
BHSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zahra Sohani
3Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
MSc, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brittany Dennis
4St George’s University of London, London, United Kingdom
BA, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Deanna Lautenbach
5Profetto-Savatteri Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
PA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Owen Kavanagh
1Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
BHSc, MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Monica Bawor
4St George’s University of London, London, United Kingdom
BSc, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laura Banfield
6Health Sciences Library, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
MLIS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jason Profetto
1Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
MD, CCFP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

PURPOSE Although the digital rectal examination (DRE) is commonly performed to screen for prostate cancer, there is limited data to support its use in primary care. This review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of DRE in screening for prostate cancer in primary care settings.

METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) from their inception to June 2016. Six reviewers, in pairs, independently screened citations for eligibility and extracted data. Pooled estimates were calculated for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of DRE in primary care settings using an inverse-variance meta-analysis. We used QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) guidelines to assess study risk of bias and quality.

RESULTS Our search yielded 8,217 studies, of which 7 studies with 9,241 patients were included after the screening process. All patients analyzed underwent both DRE and biopsy. Pooled sensitivity of DRE performed by primary care clinicians was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.36–0.67; I2 = 98.4%) and pooled specificity was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.41–0.76; I2 = 99.4%). Pooled PPV was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.31–0.52; I2 = 97.2%), and pooled NPV was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.58–0.70; I2 = 95.0%). The quality of evidence as assessed with GRADE was very low.

CONCLUSION Given the considerable lack of evidence supporting its efficacy, we recommend against routine performance of DRE to screen for prostate cancer in the primary care setting.

  • digital rectal examination
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • malignancy
  • diagnosis
  • primary health care

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of interest: authors report none.

  • Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42016042585. July 8, 2016.

  • Authors’ contributions: J.P. and L.N. conceived the research question. J.P., L.N., and B.D. designed the review protocol. L.N. and L.B. designed the search strategy, which was completed by L.B. The systematic screening of studies for inclusion independently and in duplicate was completed by J.P., L.N., H.R., B.D., D.W., O.K., and M.B. L.N. and H.R. performed data extraction and quality assessment of included studies independently and in duplicate. Z.S. performed analyses. All authors contributed equally to the writing and revision of the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

  • Supplementary materials: Available at http://www.AnnFamMed.org/content/16/2/149/suppl/DC1/.

  • Received for publication April 19, 2017.
  • Revision received September 21, 2017.
  • Accepted for publication October 4, 2017.
  • © 2018 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.
View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 16 (2)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 16 (2)
Vol. 16, Issue 2
March/April 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
14 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Leen Naji, Harkanwal Randhawa, Zahra Sohani, Brittany Dennis, Deanna Lautenbach, Owen Kavanagh, Monica Bawor, Laura Banfield, Jason Profetto
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2018, 16 (2) 149-154; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2205

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Leen Naji, Harkanwal Randhawa, Zahra Sohani, Brittany Dennis, Deanna Lautenbach, Owen Kavanagh, Monica Bawor, Laura Banfield, Jason Profetto
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2018, 16 (2) 149-154; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2205
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Towards robust medical machine olfaction: debiasing GC-MS data enhances prostate cancer diagnosis from urine volatiles
  • Potential impact of a population-based screening program on the increased burden of prostate cancer in Thailand: A simulation study
  • Diagnostic Efficacy of Various Imaging Modalities Across Different Stages of Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Studies
  • Optimising the use of the prostate- specific antigen blood test in asymptomatic men for early prostate cancer detection in primary care: report from a UK clinical consensus
  • The accuracy of machine learning models using ultrasound images in prostate cancer diagnosis: A systematic review
  • Is one narrative enough? Analytical tools should match the problems they address
  • The diagnostic value of RASSF1A promoter methylation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Educational implications of changing the guidelines for the digital rectal examination
  • Repercussions de la modification des lignes directrices pour lexamen rectal digital sur la formation des etudiants
  • PCASTt/SPCG-17--a randomised trial of active surveillance in prostate cancer: rationale and design
  • Identification of key regulators in Prostate cancer from gene expression datasets of patients
  • Large-scale Circulating microRNA Profiling for the Liquid Biopsy of Prostate Cancer
  • In This Issue: Refining Care and its Frameworks
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Chest Pain in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of Risk Stratification Tools to Rule Out Acute Coronary Syndrome
  • Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Regimen for Mild/Moderately Severe COVID-19: A Rapid Review With Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
  • Clinically Important Benefits and Harms of Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting Amyloid for the Treatment of Alzheimer Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Show more Systematic Review

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Prevention
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods
  • Other topics:
    • Clinical practice guidelines

Keywords

  • digital rectal examination
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • malignancy
  • diagnosis
  • primary health care

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine