Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the preferences of male primary care patients and their spouses for the outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment, and quality of life with metastatic prostate cancer.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional design.

SETTING: Primary care clinics in Galveston County, Texas.

PATIENTS: One hundred sixty-eight couples in which the husband was a primary care patient and a candidate for prostate cancer screening.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preferences were measured as utilities for treatment outcomes and quality of life with metastatic disease by the time trade-off method for the husband and the wife individually and then conjointly for the couple. For each health state considered, husbands associated lower utilities for the health states than did their wives. Couples’ utilities fell between those of husbands and wives (all comparisons were significant at P<.01). For partial and complete impotence and mild-to-moderate incontinence, the median utility value for the wives was 1.0, indicating that most wives did not associate disutility with their husbands having to experience these treatment complications.

CONCLUSIONS: Male primary care patients who are candidates for prostate cancer screening evaluate the outcomes of prostate cancer treatment and life with advanced prostate cancer as being far worse than do their wives. Because the choice between quantity and quality of life is a highly individualistic one, both the patient and his partner should be involved in making decisions about prostate cancer screening.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2002. Atlanta, Ga; 2002.

  2. von Eschenbach A, Ho R, Murphy GP, Cunningham M, Lins N. American Cancer Society Guideline for early detection of prostate cancer: update 1997. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997;47:261–4.

    Google Scholar 

  3. American Urological Association. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) best practice policy. Oncology (Huntingt). 2000;14:267–72, 77–8, 280 passim.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barry MJ, Fleming C, Coley CM, Wasson JH, Fahs MC, Oesterling JE. Should Medicare provide reimbursement for prostate-specific antigen testing for early detection of prostate cancer? Part I: framing the debate. Urology. 1995;46:2–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lu-Yao G, Albertsen PC, Stanford JL, Stukel TA, Walker-Corkery ES, Barry MJ. Natural experiment examining impact of aggressive screening and treatment on prostate cancer mortality in two fixed cohorts from Seattle area and Connecticut. BMJ. 2002;325:740.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: recommendation and rationale. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:915–6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ferrini R, Woolf SH. American College of Preventive Medicine Practice Policy: screening for prostate cancer in American men. Am J Prev Med. 1998;15:81–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kassirer JP. Incorporating patients’ preferences into medical decisions. N Engl J Med. 1994;330:1895–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cantor SB, Spann SJ, Volk RJ, Cardenas MP, Warren MM. Prostate cancer screening: a decision analysis. J Fam Pract. 1995;41:33–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, Trachtenberg J, Pauker SG, Detsky AS. Screening for prostate cancer. A decision analytic view. JAMA. 1994;272:773–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mold JW, Stein HF. The cascade effect in the clinical care of patients. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:512–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Potosky AL, Legler J, Albertsen PC, et al. Health outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1582–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Potosky AL, Knopf K, Clegg LX, et al. Quality-of-life outcomes after primary androgen deprivation therapy: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3750–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Potosky AL, Reeve BB, Clegg LX, et al. Quality of life following localized prostate cancer treated initially with androgen deprivation therapy or no therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:430–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stanford JL, Feng Z, Hamilton AS, et al. Urinary and sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. JAMA. 2000;283:354–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Smith DS, Carvalhal GF, Schneider K, Krygiel J, Yan Y, Catalona WJ. Quality-of-life outcomes for men with prostate carcinoma detected by screening. Cancer. 2000;88:1454–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Volk RJ, Cantor SB, Spann SJ, Cass AR, Cardenas MP, Warren MM. Preferences of husbands and wives for prostate cancer screening. Arch Fam Med. 1997;6:72–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Boehmer U, Clark JA. Married couples’ perspectives on prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment decision-making. Psychooncology. 2001;10:147–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Boehmer U, Clark JA. Communication about prostate cancer between men and their wives. J Fam Pract. 2001;50:226–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Cliff AM, MacDonagh RP. Psychosocial morbidity in prostate cancer. II. A comparison of patients and partners. BJU Int. 2000;86:834–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gold MR, Patrick DL. Identifying and valuing outcomes. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, eds. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996:82–134.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sox HC Jr, Blatt MA, Higgins MC, Marton KI. Medical Decision Making. Boston, Mass: Butterworths; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Torrance GW. Utility approach to measuring health related quality of life. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:593–600.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Krahn M, Ritvo P, Irvine J, et al. Construction of the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS): a multiattribute health state classification system for prostate cancer. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:920–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Litwin MS, Melmed GY, Nakazon T. Life after radical prostatectomy: a longitudinal study. J Urol. 2001;166:587–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Naglie G, Krahn MD, Naimark D, Redelmeier DA, Detsky AS. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 3—estimating probabilities and utilities. Med Decis Making. 1997;17:136–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Statistics of the United States, 1988. Vol. 2. Part A. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service; 1991, Publication PHS 91 1101.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nease RF Jr, Kneeland T, O’Connor GT, et al. and the Ischemic Heart Disease Patient Outcomes Research Team. Variation in patient utilities for outcomes of the management of chronic stable angina. Implications for clinical practice guidelines. JAMA. 1995;273:1185–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Siegel S, Castellan NJ Jr. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. 11.0.1 ed. Chicago, Ill: SPSS, Inc.; 2001.

  31. Smith DS, Krygiel J, Nease RF Jr, Sumner WII, Catalona WJ. Patient preferences for outcomes associated with surgical management of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2002;167:2117–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Albertsen PC, Nease RF Jr, Potosky AL. Assessment of patient preferences among men with prostate cancer. J Urol. 1998;159:158–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Krahn M, Ritvo P, Irvine J, et al. Patient and community preferences for outcomes in prostate cancer: implications for clinical policy. Med Care. 2003;41:153–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Litwin MS, Hays RD, Fink A, Ganz PA, Leake B, Brook RH. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure. Med Care. 1998;36:1002–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Litwin MS, Nied RJ, Dhanani N. Health-related quality of life in men with erectile dysfunction. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13:159–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Helgason AR, Adolfsson J, Dickman P, Fredrikson M, Arver S, Steineck G. Waning sexual function—the most important disease-specific distress for patients with prostate cancer. Br J Cancer. 1996;73:1417–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Singer PA, Tasch ES, Stocking C, Rubin S, Siegler M, Weichselbaum R. Sex or survival: trade-offs between quality and quantity of life. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9:328–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. O’Rourke ME. Narrowing the options: the process of deciding on prostate cancer treatment. Cancer Invest. 1999;17:349–59.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kornblith AB, Herr HW, Ofman US, Scher HI, Holland JC. Quality of life of patients with prostate cancer and their spouses. The value of a data base in clinical care. Cancer. 1994;73:2791–802.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Northouse LL, Mood D, Templin T, Mellon S, George T. Couples’ patterns of adjustment to colon cancer. Soc Sci Med. 2000;50:271–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ptacek JT, Pierce GR, Ptacek JJ, Nogel C. Stress and coping processes in men with prostate cancer: the divergent views of husbands and wives. J Soc Clin Psychol. 1999;18:299–324.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Carlson LE, Ottenbreit N, St Pierre M, Bultz BD. Partner understanding of the breast and prostate cancer experience. Cancer Nurs. 2001;24:231–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Harvei S, Kravdal O. The importance of marital and socioeconomic status in incidence and survival of prostate cancer. An analysis of complete Norwegian birth cohorts. Prev Med. 1997;26(5 Part 1): 623–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Bennett CL, Chapman G, Elstein AS, et al. A comparison of perspectives on prostate cancer: analysis of utility assessments of patients and physicians. Eur Urol. 1997;32(suppl 3):86–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Read JL, Quinn RJ, Berwick DM, Fineberg HV, Weinstein MC. Preferences for health outcomes: comparison of assessment methods. Med Decis Making. 1984;4:315–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Irvine J. What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:1414–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. O’Connor AM, Fiset V, DeGrasse C, et al. Decision aids for patients considering options affecting cancer outcomes: evidence of efficacy and policy implications. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;25:67–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, 3701 Kirby Drive, Suite 600, 77098-3915, Houston, TX

    Robert J. Volk PhD & Stephen J. Spann MD

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Section of Health Services Research, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex

    Scott B. Cantor PhD

  3. Department of Family Medicine, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Tex

    Alvah R. Cass MD, SM

  4. Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Tex

    Susan C. Weller PhD

  5. Division of Clinical Decision Making and Health Care, Toronto General Research Institute, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada

    Murray D. Krahn MD, MSc

Authors
  1. Robert J. Volk PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott B. Cantor PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alvah R. Cass MD, SM
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephen J. Spann MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Susan C. Weller PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Murray D. Krahn MD, MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert J. Volk PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Volk, R.J., Cantor, S.B., Cass, A.R. et al. Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment. J GEN INTERN MED 19, 339–348 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30046.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30046.x

Key words

Search

Navigation