Literature DB >> 28437031

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires for men who have radical surgery for prostate cancer: a conceptual review of existing instruments.

Evangelia Protopapa1, Jan van der Meulen1, Caroline M Moore2, Sarah C Smith1.   

Abstract

To critically review conceptual frameworks for available patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires in men having radical prostatectomy (RP), psychometrically evaluate each questionnaire, and identify whether each is appropriate for use at the level of the individual patient. We searched PubMed, the Reports and Publications database of the University of Oxford Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Group and the website of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) for psychometric reviews of prostate cancer-specific PRO questionnaires. From these we identified relevant questionnaires and critically appraised the conceptual content, guided by the Wilson and Cleary framework and psychometric properties, using well established criteria. The searches found four reviews and one recommendation paper. We identified seven prostate cancer-specific PROs: the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26), Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-50 (EPIC-50), University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Prostate Cancer Subscale (FACT-P PCS), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - prostate specific 25-item (EORTC QLQ-PR25), Prostate Cancer - Quality of Life (PC-QoL), and Symptom Tracking and Reporting (STAR). Six out of seven measures purported to measure health-related quality of life (HRQL), but items focused strongly on urinary and sexual symptoms/functioning. The remaining questionnaire (STAR) claimed to assess functional recovery after RP. The psychometric evidence for these questionnaires was incomplete and variable in quality; none had evidence that they were appropriate for use with individual patients. Several questionnaires provide the basis of measures of urinary and/or sexual symptoms/functioning. Further work should explore other aspects of HRQL that are important for men having RP. Further psychometric work is also needed to determine whether they can be used at the individual level.
© 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; health-related quality of life; patient-reported outcomes; psychometric

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28437031     DOI: 10.1111/bju.13896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  8 in total

1.  Development and Validation of Crosswalks for Patient-reported Sexual and Urinary Outcomes Between Commonly Used Instruments.

Authors:  Karandeep Singh; Amy L Tin; Rodney L Dunn; Tae Kim; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures into health care for men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Udit Singhal; Ted A Skolarus; John L Gore; Matthew G Parry; Ronald C Chen; Julie Nossiter; Alan Paniagua-Cruz; Arvin K George; Paul Cathcart; Jan van der Meulen; Daniela A Wittmann
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 16.430

Review 3.  Patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Margot E Lodge; Chris Moran; Adam D J Sutton; Hui-Ching Lee; Jugdeep K Dhesi; Nadine E Andrew; Darshini R Ayton; David J Hunter-Smith; Velandai K Srikanth; David A Snowdon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  A prospective study of patient reported urinary incontinence among American, Norwegian and Spanish men 1 year after prostatectomy.

Authors:  Anne Holck Storås; Martin G Sanda; Olatz Garin; Peter Chang; Dattatraya Patil; Catrina Crociani; Jose Francisco Suarez; Milada Cvancarova; Jon Håvard Loge; Sophie D Fosså
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2019-08-19

Review 5.  Quality of mental health questionnaires in conflict-affected adult populations in low and middle income countries: A systematic review.

Authors:  Sharon Christy; Chesmal Siriwardhana; Julia Lohmann; Bayard Roberts; Sarah Smith
Journal:  J Migr Health       Date:  2021-10-08

Review 6.  Treating the patient and not just the cancer: therapeutic burden in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Daniel E Spratt; Neal Shore; Oliver Sartor; Dana Rathkopf; Kara Olivier
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 5.554

7.  Single institution followed by national implementation of systematic surgical quality control and feedback for radical prostatectomy: a 20-year journey.

Authors:  J Stranne; E Axen; I Franck-Lissbrant; P Fransson; M Frånlund; J Hugosson; A Khatami; K Koss-Modig; P Lodding; M Nyberg; P Stattin; O Bratt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-08-06       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Assessment of a patient-reported outcome measure in men with prostate cancer who had radical surgery: a Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Eva Protopapa; Jan van der Meulen; Caroline M Moore; Sarah C Smith
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-11-14       Impact factor: 2.692

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.