Bryce B Reeve1, Arnold L Potosky, Gordon B Willis. 1. Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7344, USA. reeveb@mail.nih.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the three domains bowel, urinary, and sexual function as they were measured in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study and examine their use in different research and practice settings. Leading prostate cancer health-related quality-of-life questionnaires include questions that measure patients' bowel, urinary, and sexual function and their perceived annoyance (or bother) caused by limited functioning. The published results are mixed on reporting function and bother independently or together as a single domain. METHODS: Statistical tools from classical measurement theory and factor analytic methods were used to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study disease-specific scales. The findings from studies of other prostate cancer outcomes scales and clinical input were included to formulate the conclusions. RESULTS: Factor analysis results uncovered a multidimensional structure within two of the three domains. The urinary domain consisted of items measuring two factors: incontinence and urinary obstructive symptoms. Sexual dysfunction consisted of two dimensions: interest in sexual activity and erectile function. CONCLUSIONS: These empirical results suggest that bowel dysfunction and urinary incontinence can each be combined with measures of bother to produce overall measures of function; however, evidence was present for the need for separate measures of sexual function, sexual interest, and perceived bother with sexual function. For informing patient-doctor communications, function and bother on all three domains should be reported separately, because treatment decisions or symptom management may vary depending on a patient's perceived concern about their health-related quality-of-life.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the three domains bowel, urinary, and sexual function as they were measured in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study and examine their use in different research and practice settings. Leading prostate cancer health-related quality-of-life questionnaires include questions that measure patients' bowel, urinary, and sexual function and their perceived annoyance (or bother) caused by limited functioning. The published results are mixed on reporting function and bother independently or together as a single domain. METHODS: Statistical tools from classical measurement theory and factor analytic methods were used to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study disease-specific scales. The findings from studies of other prostate cancer outcomes scales and clinical input were included to formulate the conclusions. RESULTS: Factor analysis results uncovered a multidimensional structure within two of the three domains. The urinary domain consisted of items measuring two factors: incontinence and urinary obstructive symptoms. Sexual dysfunction consisted of two dimensions: interest in sexual activity and erectile function. CONCLUSIONS: These empirical results suggest that bowel dysfunction and urinary incontinence can each be combined with measures of bother to produce overall measures of function; however, evidence was present for the need for separate measures of sexual function, sexual interest, and perceived bother with sexual function. For informing patient-doctor communications, function and bother on all three domains should be reported separately, because treatment decisions or symptom management may vary depending on a patient's perceived concern about their health-related quality-of-life.
Authors: Steven B Zeliadt; Scott D Ramsey; Arnold L Potosky; Neeraj K Arora; David K Blough; Ingrid Oakley-Girvan; Ann S Hamilton; Stephen K Van Den Eeden; David F Penson Journal: Patient Date: 2008-07-01 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: Scott D Ramsey; Steven B Zeliadt; David K Blough; Catherine R Fedorenko; Megan E Fairweather; Cara L McDermott; David F Penson; Stephen K Van Den Eeden; Ann S Hamilton; Neeraj K Arora Journal: Urology Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Anne Holck Storås; Martin G Sanda; Montse Ferrer; Jon Håvard Loge; Alv A Dahl; Eivind A S Steinsvik; Ferran Guedea; Milada Cvancarova; Sophie D Fosså Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2014-01-03 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Matthew J Resnick; Tatsuki Koyama; Kang-Hsien Fan; Peter C Albertsen; Michael Goodman; Ann S Hamilton; Richard M Hoffman; Arnold L Potosky; Janet L Stanford; Antoinette M Stroup; R Lawrence Van Horn; David F Penson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M T King; R Viney; D P Smith; I Hossain; D Street; E Savage; S Fowler; M P Berry; M Stockler; P Cozzi; P Stricker; J Ward; B K Armstrong Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-01-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Erik Wibowo; Richard J Wassersug; John W Robinson; Pablo Santos-Iglesias; Andrew Matthew; Deborah L McLeod; Lauren M Walker Journal: Am J Mens Health Date: 2020 Jan-Feb
Authors: Onita Bhattasali; Leonard N Chen; Jennifer Woo; Jee-Won Park; Joy S Kim; Rudy Moures; Thomas Yung; Siyuan Lei; Brian T Collins; Keith Kowalczyk; Simeng Suy; Anatoly Dritschilo; John H Lynch; Sean P Collins Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-02-11 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Daniel Y Joh; Leonard N Chen; Gerald Porter; Aditi Bhagat; Sumit Sood; Joy S Kim; Rudy Moures; Thomas Yung; Siyuan Lei; Brian T Collins; Andrew W Ju; Simeng Suy; John Carroll; John H Lynch; Anatoly Dritschilo; Sean P Collins Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-12-12 Impact factor: 3.481