Oral Presentation Victorian Integrated Cancer Service Conference 2015

Comparison of patient-reported quality-of-life and complications in men diagnosed and/or treated for prostate cancer between two modes of administration (#48)

Rasa Ruseckaite 1 , Fanny Sampurno 1 , Jeremy Millar 2 , Sue Evans 1
  1. DEPM, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
  2. William Buckland Radiation Oncology Service, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne

Aim

To (1) assess the level of consistency between the Quality of Life scores of prostate cancer men for urinary/ bowel/ sexual bother collected via telephone vs self-administered survey; (2) determine factors associated with variation in level of agreement, and (3) assess the efficacy of telephone interview as a mode of administration against the “gold standard” tool EPIC-26.

 Methods

Cohen’s Kappa coefficients were calculated for urinary/bowel/sexual health domains to investigate test-retest reliability across modes of administration. Logistic regression models explored patients’ characteristics associated with the magnitude of urinary/ bowel/sexual problem. Sensitivities and specificities of the telephone mode in reference to “gold standard” were further measured.

 Results

From 221 men who agreed to participate in the study, 168 (76.0%) returned completed questionnaires. Kappa –linear model resulted in a moderate agreement across the urinary/bowel/sexual bother scores for both modes of administration.  Level of exact agreement ranged from 78%-90%, with greatest concordance recorded for bowel bother (90%). Sensitivity tests revealed, that 68% of men with a moderate/big sexual problem during the phone interviews would respond of suffering from a moderate/big sexual problem.  A statistically significant association was observed between self-reported big sexual bother, age, risk of the disease and whether men received active treatment(s) (Chi²:8.18, p=0.042).

 Conclusion

Results of this study explored the validity of the telephone administered interviews; however more research is required to determine the differences between self-administered and telephone interviews in men with prostate cancer men.