PURPOSE: Measuring the health related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer in routine clinical practice is hindered by the lack of instruments enabling efficient, real-time, point of care scoring of multiple health related quality of life domains. Thus, we developed an instrument for this purpose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice is a 1-page, 16-item questionnaire that we constructed to measure urinary incontinence, urinary irritation, and the bowel, sexual and hormonal health related quality of life domains. We eliminated conceptually overlapping items from the 3-page Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 and revised the questionnaire format to mirror the AUA symptom index, thereby enabling practitioners to calculate health related quality of life scores at the point of care. We administered the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice to a new cohort of patients with prostate cancer in community based and academic oncology, radiation, and urology practices to evaluate instrument validity as well as ease of use in clinical practice. RESULTS: A total of 175 treated and 132 untreated subjects with prostate cancer completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice. The domain scores of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice correlated highly with the respective domain scores from longer versions of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (r≥0.93 for all domains). The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.64-0.84) and sensitivity to prostate cancer treatment related effects (p<0.05 in each of 5 health related quality of life domains). Patients completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice efficiently (96% in less than 10 minutes and with 11% missing items). It was deemed very convenient by clinicians in 87% of routine clinical encounters and clinicians accurately scored completed questionnaires 94% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice is a valid instrument that enables patient reported, health related quality of life to be measured efficiently and accurately at the point of care, and thereby facilitates improved emphasis and management of patient reported outcomes.
PURPOSE: Measuring the health related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer in routine clinical practice is hindered by the lack of instruments enabling efficient, real-time, point of care scoring of multiple health related quality of life domains. Thus, we developed an instrument for this purpose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice is a 1-page, 16-item questionnaire that we constructed to measure urinary incontinence, urinary irritation, and the bowel, sexual and hormonal health related quality of life domains. We eliminated conceptually overlapping items from the 3-page Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 and revised the questionnaire format to mirror the AUA symptom index, thereby enabling practitioners to calculate health related quality of life scores at the point of care. We administered the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice to a new cohort of patients with prostate cancer in community based and academic oncology, radiation, and urology practices to evaluate instrument validity as well as ease of use in clinical practice. RESULTS: A total of 175 treated and 132 untreated subjects with prostate cancer completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice. The domain scores of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice correlated highly with the respective domain scores from longer versions of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (r≥0.93 for all domains). The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.64-0.84) and sensitivity to prostate cancer treatment related effects (p<0.05 in each of 5 health related quality of life domains). Patients completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice efficiently (96% in less than 10 minutes and with 11% missing items). It was deemed very convenient by clinicians in 87% of routine clinical encounters and clinicians accurately scored completed questionnaires 94% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice is a valid instrument that enables patient reported, health related quality of life to be measured efficiently and accurately at the point of care, and thereby facilitates improved emphasis and management of patient reported outcomes.
Authors: J B Madalinska; M L Essink-Bot; H J de Koning; W J Kirkels; P J van der Maas; F H Schröder Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A L Potosky; J Legler; P C Albertsen; J L Stanford; F D Gilliland; A S Hamilton; J W Eley; R A Stephenson; L C Harlan Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-10-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: John D McConnell; Claus G Roehrborn; Oliver M Bautista; Gerald L Andriole; Christopher M Dixon; John W Kusek; Herbert Lepor; Kevin T McVary; Leroy M Nyberg; Harry S Clarke; E David Crawford; Ananias Diokno; John P Foley; Harris E Foster; Stephen C Jacobs; Steven A Kaplan; Karl J Kreder; Michael M Lieber; M Scott Lucia; Gary J Miller; Mani Menon; Douglas F Milam; Joe W Ramsdell; Noah S Schenkman; Kevin M Slawin; Joseph A Smith Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-12-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Matthew R Smith; Melissa Goode; Anthony L Zietman; Francis J McGovern; Hang Lee; Joel S Finkelstein Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; D Schultz; K Blank; G A Broderick; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; I Kaplan; C J Beard; A Wein Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-09-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Meredith M Regan; Matthew R Cooperberg; John T Wei; Jeff M Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Larry Hembroff; Natalia Sadetsky; Christopher S Saigal; Mark S Litwin; Eric Klein; Adam S Kibel; Daniel A Hamstra; Louis L Pisters; Deborah A Kuban; Irving D Kaplan; David P Wood; Jay Ciezki; Rodney L Dunn; Peter R Carroll; Martin G Sanda Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-09-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Maria Thor; Caroline E Olsson; Jung Hun Oh; David Alsadius; Niclas Pettersson; Joseph O Deasy; Gunnar Steineck Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2015-11-13 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Mitchell S Anscher; Michael G Chang; Drew Moghanaki; Mihaela Rosu; Ross B Mikkelsen; Diane Holdford; Vicki Skinner; Baruch M Grob; Arun Sanyal; Aiping Wang; Nitai D Mukhopadhyay Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Maria Thor; Caroline Olsson; Jung Hun Oh; Stine Elleberg Petersen; David Alsadius; Lise Bentzen; Niclas Pettersson; Ludvig Paul Muren; Morten Høyer; Gunnar Steineck; Joseph O Deasy Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-02-12 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Maximilian F Lang; Mark D Tyson; JoAnn Rudd Alvarez; Tatsuki Koyama; Karen E Hoffman; Matthew J Resnick; Matthew R Cooperberg; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Vivien Chen; Lisa E Paddock; Ann S Hamilton; Mia Hashibe; Michael Goodman; Sheldon Greenfield; Sherrie H Kaplan; Antoinette Stroup; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas Journal: Urology Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 2.649