Roman Sosnowski1, Marta Kulpa2, Mariola Kosowicz2, Fabrizio Presicce3, Francesco Porpiglia4, Andrea Tubaro3, Cosimo DE Nunzio3, Tomasz Demkow5. 1. Department of Uro-Oncology, M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland - roman.sosnowski@gmail.com. 2. Department of Psycho-Oncology, M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland. 3. Department of Urology, Sant'Andrea Hospital, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 4. Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. 5. Department of Uro-Oncology, M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of patients' expectations and quality of life in uro-oncology is considered an important outcome of treatment efficacy and satisfaction. Aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the most frequently adopted tools in uro-oncology to assess Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search until October 2015 was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed combining the following terms: "quality of life," "health-related quality of life," "kidney cancer," "bladder cancer," "prostate cancer." Additional references were obtained from the reference list of full-text manuscripts. Data were synthesized using meta-analytic methods conformed to the PRISMA statement. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: HRQoL is a fundamental step in evaluating treatment outcome in patients with urological cancers. HRQoL is mostly measured through several questionnaires, which are generally categorized in generic questionnaires, exploring the patient's well-being en bloc; specific questionnaires, assessing each single domain of health status; and uro-oncological specific questionnaires, mainly characterized by a modular approach. Although different questionnaires have been proposed and validated, the standard method to be adopted in urology is far from the solution and further studies should investigate the strength and weakness of the different questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL questionnaires should become a standard method to evaluate medical/surgical outcomes in uro-oncology. Their implementation may significantly improve patients' satisfaction and help physicians in the decision-making process and possibly reduce health care costs.
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of patients' expectations and quality of life in uro-oncology is considered an important outcome of treatment efficacy and satisfaction. Aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the most frequently adopted tools in uro-oncology to assess Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search until October 2015 was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed combining the following terms: "quality of life," "health-related quality of life," "kidney cancer," "bladder cancer," "prostate cancer." Additional references were obtained from the reference list of full-text manuscripts. Data were synthesized using meta-analytic methods conformed to the PRISMA statement. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: HRQoL is a fundamental step in evaluating treatment outcome in patients with urological cancers. HRQoL is mostly measured through several questionnaires, which are generally categorized in generic questionnaires, exploring the patient's well-being en bloc; specific questionnaires, assessing each single domain of health status; and uro-oncological specific questionnaires, mainly characterized by a modular approach. Although different questionnaires have been proposed and validated, the standard method to be adopted in urology is far from the solution and further studies should investigate the strength and weakness of the different questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL questionnaires should become a standard method to evaluate medical/surgical outcomes in uro-oncology. Their implementation may significantly improve patients' satisfaction and help physicians in the decision-making process and possibly reduce health care costs.
Authors: Lorenzo Masieri; Francesco Sessa; Andrea Mari; Riccardo Campi; Gianmartin Cito; Pierangelo Verrienti; Chiara Nozzoli; Riccardo Saccardi; Simone Sforza; Fabrizio Di Maida; Antonio Andrea Grosso; Marco Carini; Andrea Minervini Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Augusta Silveira; Teresa Sequeira; Joaquim Gonçalves; Pedro Lopes Ferreira Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2022-05-21 Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Roman Sosnowski; Marta Kulpa; Urszula Ziętalewicz; Jan Karol Wolski; Robert Nowakowski; Robert Bakuła; Tomasz Demkow Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2017-04-13
Authors: Katja Leuteritz; Diana Richter; Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Andreas Hinz Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-07-18 Impact factor: 4.147