OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of demographic, clinical, treatment and patient-reported parameters on satisfaction with prostate cancer care. Despite the significant worldwide impact of prostate cancer, few data are available specifically addressing satisfaction with treatment-related care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CaPSURE comprises participants from 40 US sites who were monitored during and after their treatment course. Participants who were diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer after 1999 underwent radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy or primary androgen deprivation, and those who also completed the satisfaction questionnaire within 2 years of treatment were included in the present study. Satisfaction was measured using a validated instrument that assesses contact with providers, confidence in providers, communication skills, humanness and overall satisfaction. Multivariable linear regression analysis were performed to evaluate the independent relationships between demographic, clinical, treatment and patient-reported parameters and satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the 3056 participants, 1927 (63%) were treated with radical prostatectomy, 843 (28%) were treated with radiation therapy and 286 (9%) were treated with primary androgen deprivation. Multivariable analysis showed that multiple patient-reported factors were independently associated with satisfaction, whereas clinical, demographic and treatment parameters were not. Baseline health-related quality of life, measured by the 36-item short-form health survey, baseline fear of cancer recurrence (all P < 0.01) and declines in the sexual (P = 0.03), urinary (P < 0.01) and bowel (P = 0.02) function domains of the University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index were all independently associated with satisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes were more strongly associated with satisfaction in the low-risk subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported factors such as health-related quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence are independently associated with satisfaction with care. Pretreatment parameters should be used to identify populations at-risk for dissatisfaction to allow for intervention and/or incorporation into treatment decision-making.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of demographic, clinical, treatment and patient-reported parameters on satisfaction with prostate cancer care. Despite the significant worldwide impact of prostate cancer, few data are available specifically addressing satisfaction with treatment-related care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CaPSURE comprises participants from 40 US sites who were monitored during and after their treatment course. Participants who were diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer after 1999 underwent radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy or primary androgen deprivation, and those who also completed the satisfaction questionnaire within 2 years of treatment were included in the present study. Satisfaction was measured using a validated instrument that assesses contact with providers, confidence in providers, communication skills, humanness and overall satisfaction. Multivariable linear regression analysis were performed to evaluate the independent relationships between demographic, clinical, treatment and patient-reported parameters and satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the 3056 participants, 1927 (63%) were treated with radical prostatectomy, 843 (28%) were treated with radiation therapy and 286 (9%) were treated with primary androgen deprivation. Multivariable analysis showed that multiple patient-reported factors were independently associated with satisfaction, whereas clinical, demographic and treatment parameters were not. Baseline health-related quality of life, measured by the 36-item short-form health survey, baseline fear of cancer recurrence (all P < 0.01) and declines in the sexual (P = 0.03), urinary (P < 0.01) and bowel (P = 0.02) function domains of the University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index were all independently associated with satisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes were more strongly associated with satisfaction in the low-risk subgroup. CONCLUSIONS:Patient-reported factors such as health-related quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence are independently associated with satisfaction with care. Pretreatment parameters should be used to identify populations at-risk for dissatisfaction to allow for intervention and/or incorporation into treatment decision-making.
Authors: A L Potosky; L C Harlan; J L Stanford; F D Gilliland; A S Hamilton; P C Albertsen; J W Eley; J M Liff; D Deapen; R A Stephenson; J Legler; C E Ferrans; J A Talcott; M S Litwin Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-10-20 Impact factor: 13.506
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: Matthew R Cooperberg; Jeanette M Broering; Mark S Litwin; Deborah P Lubeck; Shilpa S Mehta; James M Henning; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Richard M Hoffman; William C Hunt; Frank D Gilliland; Robert A Stephenson; Arnold L Potosky Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Richard M Hoffman; Mary Lo; Jack A Clark; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Michael Goodman; David F Penson; Janet L Stanford; Antoinette M Stroup; Ann S Hamilton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael J Zelefsky; Bing Ying Poon; James Eastham; Andrew Vickers; Xin Pei; Peter T Scardino Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-01-09 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Jesse D Le; Samuel Stephenson; Michelle Brugger; David Y Lu; Patricia Lieu; Geoffrey A Sonn; Shyam Natarajan; Frederick J Dorey; Jiaoti Huang; Daniel J A Margolis; Robert E Reiter; Leonard S Marks Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Kimberly Davis; Paula Bellini; Charlotte Hagerman; Riley Zinar; Daniel Leigh; Richard Hoffman; David Aaronson; Stephen Van Den Eeden; George Philips; Kathryn Taylor Journal: Urology Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Andréa Maria Eleutério de Barros Lima Martins; Raquel Conceição Ferreira; Pedro Eleutério dos Santos-Neto; Danilo Lima Carreiro; João Gabriel Silva Souza; Efigênia Ferreira e Ferreira Journal: Rev Saude Publica Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 2.106
Authors: Manoj V Rao; Marcus L Quek; Gautam Jayram; Chandy Ellimoottil; Timothy Sondej; Cory M Hugen; Robert C Flanigan; Gary D Steinberg Journal: ISRN Urol Date: 2013-07-17
Authors: S Faithfull; A Lemanska; P Aslet; N Bhatt; J Coe; L Drudge-Coates; M Feneley; R Glynn-Jones; M Kirby; S Langley; T McNicholas; J Newman; C C Smith; A Sahai; E Trueman; H Payne Journal: Int J Clin Pract Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: J Cockle-Hearne; F Charnay-Sonnek; L Denis; H E Fairbanks; D Kelly; S Kav; K Leonard; E van Muilekom; P Fernandez-Ortega; B T Jensen; S Faithfull Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-09-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Daniel Baumunk; Roman Reunkoff; Julien Kushner; Alexandra Baumunk; Carsten Kempkensteffen; Ursula Steiner; Steffen Weikert; Lutz Moser; Mark Schrader; Stefan Höcht; Thomas Wiegel; Kurt Miller; Martin Schostak Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-08-05 Impact factor: 2.796