OBJECTIVE: The incidence of prostate cancer has risen sharply in the last decade, yet knowledge about the psychological health of men with this disease is still limited. A study was therefore undertaken to identify (1) the prevalence of psychological distress in these males, and (2) factors predicting psychological distress. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional survey design by means of a self-administered questionnaire. METHOD: A sample of 94 men with various stages of prostate cancer completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate Instrument (FACT-P), the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) and items measuring satisfaction with medical care. RESULTS: We detected a prevalence rate of 38% of participants reporting psychological distress corresponding to a HADS cut-off score at or above 15. A standard multivariate regression analysis revealed social/family well-being, physical well-being and functional well-being as significant inverse predictors of psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals should be aware of the potential for psychological distress in patients exhibiting poor physical functioning and those with apparent deficits in social or family support in this under-studied group of patients. Strategies for psychosocial intervention are implied.
OBJECTIVE: The incidence of prostate cancer has risen sharply in the last decade, yet knowledge about the psychological health of men with this disease is still limited. A study was therefore undertaken to identify (1) the prevalence of psychological distress in these males, and (2) factors predicting psychological distress. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional survey design by means of a self-administered questionnaire. METHOD: A sample of 94 men with various stages of prostate cancer completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate Instrument (FACT-P), the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) and items measuring satisfaction with medical care. RESULTS: We detected a prevalence rate of 38% of participants reporting psychological distress corresponding to a HADS cut-off score at or above 15. A standard multivariate regression analysis revealed social/family well-being, physical well-being and functional well-being as significant inverse predictors of psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals should be aware of the potential for psychological distress in patients exhibiting poor physical functioning and those with apparent deficits in social or family support in this under-studied group of patients. Strategies for psychosocial intervention are implied.
Authors: Min Joon Lee; Viranda H Jayalath; Wei Xu; Lin Lu; Stephen J Freedland; Neil E Fleshner; Girish S Kulkarni; Antonio Finelli; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Robert J Hamilton Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2020-05-18 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Nihal E Mohamed; Dana H Bovbjerg; Guy H Montgomery; Simon J Hall; Michael A Diefenbach Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2011-07-27 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Eric S Zhou; Frank J Penedo; Natalie E Bustillo; Catherine Benedict; Mikal Rasheed; Suzanne Lechner; Mark Soloway; Bruce R Kava; Neil Schneiderman; Michael H Antoni Journal: J Support Oncol Date: 2010 Sep-Oct
Authors: Eric S Zhou; Frank J Penedo; John E Lewis; Mikal Rasheed; Lara Traeger; Suzanne Lechner; Mark Soloway; Bruce R Kava; Michael H Antoni Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Trent Jackson; Kimberly Davis; Lisa Haisfield; David Dawson; John Lynch; James Regan; Arnold Kwart; Barlow Lynch; Kathryn Taylor Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2009-09-22