Christie A. Befort , Michael J. Zelefsky , Peter T. Scardino , Evelinn Borrayo , R. Brian Giesler , Michael W. Kattan
{"title":"A Measure of Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer: Results from Ongoing Scale Development","authors":"Christie A. Befort , Michael J. Zelefsky , Peter T. Scardino , Evelinn Borrayo , R. Brian Giesler , Michael W. Kattan","doi":"10.3816/CGC.2005.n.017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>We revised our prostate cancer–specific measure to better address the physiologic complications of the 3 major therapies for clinically localized prostate cancer and to assess the impact of symptoms on broader aspects of patient functioning. The study used a crosssectional design, and participants completed the measure in a clinical setting.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><p>Participants underwent radical prostatectomy (n = 130), external beam radiation therapy (n = 120), or brachytherapy (n = 129). Their mean age was 66 years (standard deviation [SD], 8.2 years), and the median time since treatment was 12.36 months (mean, 21.7; SD, 25.4). Items were derived from previously validated instruments or developed based on the clinical experience of a multidisciplinary group of health professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The revised instrument included 46 items that formed 8 physiologic scales (2 urinary, 3 sexual, and 3 bowel function); 3 associated bother scales; and cancer worry, treatment regret, and treatment satisfaction scales. Correlations among scales provided evidence of convergent/divergent validity. Significant group differences were found using analysis of covariance (with time since treatment and age as covariates) on 6 of the 8 physiologic scales and on bowel bother and treatment satisfaction.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The instrument provides a sensitive measure of physiologic differences across the 3 primary treatment groups and indicates that there are few differences across treatment groups on broader aspects of health-related quality of life. Further development of the measure is recommended.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":87076,"journal":{"name":"Clinical prostate cancer","volume":"4 2","pages":"Pages 100-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3816/CGC.2005.n.017","citationCount":"33","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical prostate cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1540035211701068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33
Abstract
Background
We revised our prostate cancer–specific measure to better address the physiologic complications of the 3 major therapies for clinically localized prostate cancer and to assess the impact of symptoms on broader aspects of patient functioning. The study used a crosssectional design, and participants completed the measure in a clinical setting.
Patients and Methods
Participants underwent radical prostatectomy (n = 130), external beam radiation therapy (n = 120), or brachytherapy (n = 129). Their mean age was 66 years (standard deviation [SD], 8.2 years), and the median time since treatment was 12.36 months (mean, 21.7; SD, 25.4). Items were derived from previously validated instruments or developed based on the clinical experience of a multidisciplinary group of health professionals.
Results
The revised instrument included 46 items that formed 8 physiologic scales (2 urinary, 3 sexual, and 3 bowel function); 3 associated bother scales; and cancer worry, treatment regret, and treatment satisfaction scales. Correlations among scales provided evidence of convergent/divergent validity. Significant group differences were found using analysis of covariance (with time since treatment and age as covariates) on 6 of the 8 physiologic scales and on bowel bother and treatment satisfaction.
Conclusion
The instrument provides a sensitive measure of physiologic differences across the 3 primary treatment groups and indicates that there are few differences across treatment groups on broader aspects of health-related quality of life. Further development of the measure is recommended.