JRSM > Volume 101, Number 3 > Pp. 133-138

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Send a Quick Comment Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Quick Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pearcy, R Articles by MacDonagh, R Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Proxy assessment of quality of life in patients with prostate cancer: how accurate are partners and urologists?

R Pearcy¹ D Waldron² C O'Boyle³   R MacDonagh Hon. Senior Lecturer  ^4,5

¹ Department of Urology, Bristol Royal Infirmary Marlborough Street, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK
² Department of Palliative Medicine, University College Hospital Galway, Republic of Ireland
³ Department of Psychology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
⁴ Department of Urology, Taunton and Somerset Hospital Taunton, Somerset, TA1 5DA, UK
⁵ Department Surgery, University of Bristol, UK

Correspondence to: Richard Pearcy. rmpearcy{at}hotmail.com

Objectives To assess the ability of partners and clinicians to make proxy judgements on behalf of patients with prostate cancer relating to selection of life priorities and quality of life (QoL).

Design 47 consecutive patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma, and their partners, were recruited. The partners were asked to assess, by proxy, the QoL of the patient by completion of a series of interview-led questionnaires assessing global QoL (SEIQoL-DW), health-related QoL (FACT-P) and overall QoL (visual analogue score [VAS]). The patients' clinicians were asked to complete the SEIQoL-DW and VAS by proxy as soon as possible after a consultation with the patient.

Setting Patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma, their partners and their clinicians.

Main outcome measures Proxy scores for SEIQoL-DW, FACT-P and VAS, as provided by partners and clinicians.

Results 25 partners made a proxy assessment of the patients. The results showed that partners were able to select similar QoL cues to those of the patients (Spearman-Rank correlation 0.89). Comparison of the QoL scores obtained from patients and partners in proxy using the questionnaires showed no statistically significant difference (paired t-test). Urologists were poor predictors of areas of life (cues) that were important to their patients. The doctors overemphasized the importance of survival, postoperative complications, urinary symptoms, sexual ability, activities of daily living and finance, but underestimated the importance of wife, family, home and religion. Comparison of the QoL scores obtained from patients and urologists by proxy showed a significantly lower score when assessed by urologists using the SEIQoL-DW questionnaire.

Conclusions Partners are able to accurately assess, by proxy, the areas of life that are of importance to patients. Clinicians, however, who are charged with making decisions on behalf of patients, are very poor judges of their patients' life priorities and QoL. This illustrates that conventional views held by most doctors regarding the priorities patients set themselves when planning treatment should be called into question and consequently suggests that the way in which doctors and patients arrive at treatment decisions must be reviewed.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?