Clinical Use of Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice to Assess Patient Reported Prostate Cancer Quality of Life Following Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Andrew A. Wagner^a ; ^b ; ^&lowast ; ; Philip J. Cheng^c ; ^&lowast ; ; Arie Carneiro^d ; Ostap Dovirak^e ; Arjun Khosla^a ; Kimberly N. Taylor^a ; Catrina M. Crociani^a ; Kyle C. McAnally^a ; Andrew Percy^f ; Lauren E. Dewey^a ; Martin G. Sanda^g ; Peter Chang^a ; ^b ; ^{pchang@bidmc.harvard.edu}
• 关键词：prostatic neoplasms/therapy ; quality of life ; outcome assessment (health care) ; questionnaires ; patient-centered care
• 刊名：The Journal of Urology
• 出版年：2017
• 出版时间：January 2017
• 年：2017
• 卷：197
• 期：1
• 页码：109-114
• 全文大小：337 K
• 卷排序：197

文摘

EPIC-CP (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice) is a short questionnaire that comprehensively measures patient reported health related quality of life at the point of care. We evaluated the feasibility of using EPIC-CP in the routine clinical care of patients with prostate cancer without research infrastructure. We compared longitudinal patient and practitioner reported prostate cancer outcomes.Materials and MethodsWe reviewed health related quality of life outcomes in 482 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at our institution from 2010 to 2014. EPIC-CP was administered and interpreted in routine clinical practice without research personnel. We compared practitioner documented rates of incontinence pad use and functional erections to patient reported rates using EPIC-CP.ResultsA total of 708 EPIC-CP questionnaires were completed. Mean urinary incontinence domain scores were significantly higher (worse) than baseline (mean ± SD 0.6 ± 0.2) 3 and 6 months after treatment (mean 3.1 ± 2.3 and 2.2 ± 2.1, respectively, each p <0.05) but they returned to baseline at 12 months (mean 1.6 ± 1.7, p >0.05). Mean sexual domain scores were significantly worse than baseline (mean 2.4 ± 2.8) at all posttreatment time points (each p <0.05). Practitioners significantly overestimated incontinence pad-free rates at 3 months (48% vs 39%) and functional erection rates at 3 months (18% vs 12%), 6 months (38% vs 23%) and 12 months (45% vs 23%, each p <0.05).ConclusionsEPIC-CP is feasible to use in the routine clinical care of patients with prostate cancer without requiring a research infrastructure. Using EPIC-CP in clinical practice may help practitioners objectively assess and appropriately manage posttreatment side effects in patients with prostate cancer.