Side‐effects of treatment for localized prostate cancer: are they valued differently by patients and healthy controls?
- 16 January 2007
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in BJU International
- Vol. 99 (4) , 801-806
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2006.06707.x
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine how men treated for localized prostate cancer and who had permanent side‐effects, and healthy controls, would value five descriptions of health states associated with side‐effects of treatment for localized prostate cancer, hypothesising that patients would value the health states as less detrimental than men with no prostate cancer. PATIENTS, SUBJECTS AND METHODS In previous research, patients with prostate cancer reported high generic quality‐of‐life scores after primary treatment, despite side‐effects; it was suggested that these patients accepted the side‐effects, i.e. urinary, bowel and sexual dysfunction, as ‘part of the bargain’ because they felt they were saved from a life‐threatening disease. Thus, we asked 54 men who had been treated for localized prostate cancer and had permanent side‐effects, and 53 healthy controls, to value five descriptions of health states. All respondents valued all descriptions using two valuation methods, a visual analogue scale (VAS, range 0–100) and time trade‐off (TTO, range 0–1). The respondent functioning was assessed using the EuroQol‐5D, completed with items on urinary, bowel and sexual function. RESULTS Patients and healthy controls had similar valuations for nine of the 10 comparisons (five health states by two methods). Valuations in both groups resulted in the same ranking order of states on the TTO and one exchange in rank order on the VAS. CONCLUSIONS When asked to value five health states associated with side‐effects of treatment for localized prostate cancer, there was no difference in the valuation of erectile, urinary and bowel dysfunction between patients with permanent side‐effects after treatment and healthy controls. More likely explanations for the high generic quality‐of‐life scores after primary treatment for prostate cancer are a response shift and insensitivity of generic health‐related quality‐of‐life measures.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Patients’ perceptions of the side-effects of prostate cancer treatment—A qualitative interview studySocial Science & Medicine, 2006
- Five‐year follow‐up of health‐related quality of life after primary treatment of localized prostate cancerInternational Journal of Cancer, 2005
- Life of the mind: The interface of psychopharmaceuticals, domestic economies, and social abandonmentAmerican Ethnologist, 2004
- Five-Year Outcomes After Prostatectomy or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: The Prostate Cancer Outcomes StudyJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2004
- Disease-specific symptoms and general quality of life of patients with prostate carcinoma before and after primary three-dimensional conformal radiotherapyCancer, 2003
- Effect of Assessment Method on the Discrepancy between Judgments of Health Disorders People have and do not have: A Web StudyMedical Decision Making, 2003
- Mapping visual analogue scale health state valuations onto standard gamble and time trade-off valuesSocial Science & Medicine, 1997
- The ‘Utility’ of the Visual Analog Scale in Medical Decision Making and Technology Assessment: Is It an Alternative to the Time Trade-off?International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1996
- Whose Utilities for Decision Analysis?Medical Decision Making, 1990
- The utility of different health states as perceived by the general publicJournal of Chronic Diseases, 1978