Cargando…

Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study

OBJECTIVE: Clinical options for managing nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) vary. Each option has side effects associated with it, leading to difficulty in decision‐making. This study aimed to assess the relationship between patient involvement in treatment decision‐making and subsequent decision r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilding, Sarah, Downing, Amy, Selby, Peter, Cross, William, Wright, Penny, Watson, Eila K., Wagland, Richard, Kind, Paul, Donnelly, David W., Hounsome, Luke, Mottram, Rebecca, Allen, Majorie, Kearney, Therese, Butcher, Hugh, Gavin, Anna, Glaser, Adam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32065691
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.5362
_version_ 1783550741423587328
author Wilding, Sarah
Downing, Amy
Selby, Peter
Cross, William
Wright, Penny
Watson, Eila K.
Wagland, Richard
Kind, Paul
Donnelly, David W.
Hounsome, Luke
Mottram, Rebecca
Allen, Majorie
Kearney, Therese
Butcher, Hugh
Gavin, Anna
Glaser, Adam
author_facet Wilding, Sarah
Downing, Amy
Selby, Peter
Cross, William
Wright, Penny
Watson, Eila K.
Wagland, Richard
Kind, Paul
Donnelly, David W.
Hounsome, Luke
Mottram, Rebecca
Allen, Majorie
Kearney, Therese
Butcher, Hugh
Gavin, Anna
Glaser, Adam
author_sort Wilding, Sarah
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Clinical options for managing nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) vary. Each option has side effects associated with it, leading to difficulty in decision‐making. This study aimed to assess the relationship between patient involvement in treatment decision‐making and subsequent decision regret (DR), and quantify the impact of health‐related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes on DR. METHODS: Men living in the United Kingdom, 18 to 42 months after diagnosis of PCa, were identified from cancer registration data and sent a questionnaire. Measures included the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), Expanded Prostate cancer Index Composite short form (EPIC‐26), EQ‐5D‐5L, and an item on involvement in treatment decision‐making. Multivariable ordinal regression was utilized, with DR categorized as none, mild, or moderate/severe regret. RESULTS: A total of 17 193 men with stage I‐III PCa completed the DRS: 36.6% reported no regret, 43.3% mild regret, and 20.0% moderate/severe regret. The odds of reporting DR were greater if men indicated their views were not taken into account odds ratio ([OR] = 6.42, 95% CI: 5.39‐7.64) or were involved “to some extent” in decision‐making (OR = 4.63, 95% CI: 4.27‐5.02), compared with men who were “definitely” involved. After adjustment, including for involvement, men reporting moderate/big problems with urinary, bowel, or sexual function were more likely to experience regret compared with men with no/small problems. Better HRQL scores were associated with lower levels of DR. CONCLUSIONS: This large‐scale study demonstrates the benefit of patient involvement in treatment decision‐making for nonmetastatic PCa. However, men experiencing side effects and poorer HRQL report greater DR. Promoting engagement in clinical decision‐making represents good practice and may reduce the risk of subsequent regret.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7317932
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73179322020-06-29 Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study Wilding, Sarah Downing, Amy Selby, Peter Cross, William Wright, Penny Watson, Eila K. Wagland, Richard Kind, Paul Donnelly, David W. Hounsome, Luke Mottram, Rebecca Allen, Majorie Kearney, Therese Butcher, Hugh Gavin, Anna Glaser, Adam Psychooncology Papers OBJECTIVE: Clinical options for managing nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) vary. Each option has side effects associated with it, leading to difficulty in decision‐making. This study aimed to assess the relationship between patient involvement in treatment decision‐making and subsequent decision regret (DR), and quantify the impact of health‐related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes on DR. METHODS: Men living in the United Kingdom, 18 to 42 months after diagnosis of PCa, were identified from cancer registration data and sent a questionnaire. Measures included the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), Expanded Prostate cancer Index Composite short form (EPIC‐26), EQ‐5D‐5L, and an item on involvement in treatment decision‐making. Multivariable ordinal regression was utilized, with DR categorized as none, mild, or moderate/severe regret. RESULTS: A total of 17 193 men with stage I‐III PCa completed the DRS: 36.6% reported no regret, 43.3% mild regret, and 20.0% moderate/severe regret. The odds of reporting DR were greater if men indicated their views were not taken into account odds ratio ([OR] = 6.42, 95% CI: 5.39‐7.64) or were involved “to some extent” in decision‐making (OR = 4.63, 95% CI: 4.27‐5.02), compared with men who were “definitely” involved. After adjustment, including for involvement, men reporting moderate/big problems with urinary, bowel, or sexual function were more likely to experience regret compared with men with no/small problems. Better HRQL scores were associated with lower levels of DR. CONCLUSIONS: This large‐scale study demonstrates the benefit of patient involvement in treatment decision‐making for nonmetastatic PCa. However, men experiencing side effects and poorer HRQL report greater DR. Promoting engagement in clinical decision‐making represents good practice and may reduce the risk of subsequent regret. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2020-02-26 2020-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7317932/ /pubmed/32065691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.5362 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Psycho?Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Papers
Wilding, Sarah
Downing, Amy
Selby, Peter
Cross, William
Wright, Penny
Watson, Eila K.
Wagland, Richard
Kind, Paul
Donnelly, David W.
Hounsome, Luke
Mottram, Rebecca
Allen, Majorie
Kearney, Therese
Butcher, Hugh
Gavin, Anna
Glaser, Adam
Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
title Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
title_full Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
title_fullStr Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
title_full_unstemmed Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
title_short Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
title_sort decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the united kingdom: a population‐based patient‐reported outcome study
topic Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32065691
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.5362
work_keys_str_mv AT wildingsarah decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT downingamy decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT selbypeter decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT crosswilliam decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT wrightpenny decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT watsoneilak decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT waglandrichard decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT kindpaul decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT donnellydavidw decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT hounsomeluke decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT mottramrebecca decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT allenmajorie decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT kearneytherese decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT butcherhugh decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT gavinanna decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy
AT glaseradam decisionregretinmenlivingwithandbeyondnonmetastaticprostatecancerintheunitedkingdomapopulationbasedpatientreportedoutcomestudy