Search

Background: The lack of consensus amongst experts delineate how important it is for patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) to make an informed decision on available treatment options through an objective discussion of the risks and benefits. One of important benefits could be seen as patient's quality of life (QoL) after treatment. We aimed to assess QoL differences in prostate cancer patients by stage and treatment for a population-based sample., Methods: The cross-sectional PCa patient population-based national level study for a prostate cancer patient population was performed. QoL was investigated with EORTC QLQ-C30. The analysis includes descriptive statistics and evaluation of differences in functional and symptom scales by stage and treatment group by predictors in the model., Results: Response rate was 79.1% (N=514). The highest QoL scores were observed in localised PCa, active surveillance treatment group. The lowest scores were observed in advanced stages, chemotherapy treatment group. Between cancer stages, statistically significant differences were observed only in scales of emotional functioning (p<0.001) and social functioning (p<0.001). Between treatment groups, statistically significant differences were observed in scales of physical functioning (p<0.001), role functioning (p<0.001), emotional functioning (p<0.001), and social functioning (p<0.001)., Conclusions: Our study highlighted statistically significant differences in QoL between cancer stages and treatment. Understanding how the QoL changes in relation with the selected treatment option can be important to the urologist and individual patient to have realistic expectations as well as to optimise treatment decisions for the prostate cancer patient when exist several alternatives.

Background: It is licely that illness perceptions can explain variations in quality of life of patients with prostate cancer across different treatment methods and stages. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine if illness perception can explain variations in quality of life of patients with prostate cancer., Material and Methods: The cross-sectional national-level study was carried out. Quality of life was evaluated with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and the Visual Analogue Scale. Illness perceptions were measured by the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire., Results: The response rate was 77.1% (N=501). The variation in global quality of life was explained (32.0%) by levels of emotional representation (β=-0.126; P=0.023) and consequences (β=-0.209; P<0.01); physical functioning (27.0%), by consequences (β=-0.203; P<0.01) and chemotherapy (β=-2.911; P=0.007); role functioning (37.0%), by emotional representations (β=-0.198; P<0.01), timeline cyclical (β=-0.209; P=0.014), and stage of the disease (β=-0.779; P=0.007); emotional functioning (43.0%), by emotional representations (β=-0.361; P<0.01) and education level (β=-0.566; P=0.025); cognitive functioning (34.0%), by educational level (β=0.714; P=0.005), emotional representations (β=-0.118; P=0.019), illness coherence (β=-0.167; P=0.030), consequences (β=-0.187; P=0.001), and hormonal therapy (β=-0.778; P=0.049); and social functioning (39.0%), by consequences (β=-0.320; P<0.01) and combined treatment (β=-1.492; P=0.016)., Conclusions: Illness perceptions may be important while investigating quality of life in patients with prostate cancer. It may underlie quality-of-life differences in this group of patients and could inform decision makers about the importance of the provision of psychosocial services to patients with prostate cancer.

Objective: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among men in Lithuania. Quality of life (QoL) assessment plays a key role in the evaluation and treatment of cancer patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors affecting the QoL of patients with prostate cancer in Lithuania., Material and Methods: A cross-sectional national-level study was performed. QoL was investigated with the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, interrelationship analysis between characteristics and multivariate logistic regression to estimate predictors and odds ratios (ORs) for each of the independent variables in the model., Results: The response rate was 74.8% (N = 486). One-quarter of respondents with prostate cancer indicated high QoL scores. Higher QoL scores were given for prostate cancer patients with lower education level [OR = 3.092, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.007-9.491, p = 0.049], having lower monthly expenses for treatment (OR = 3.653, CI 1.318-10.128, p = 0.013), disease stage II (by patient conveyance) (OR = 10.053, CI 1.015-99.534, p = 0.048), disease stage I (by medical record) (OR = 2.19E + 08, CI 218514200.17-218514200.17, p < 0.001) and in those with undisclosed disease stage (OR = 9.220, CI 1.251-67.965, p = 0.029)., Conclusions: Significant predictors for higher QoL scores were education level, own monthly expenses for treatment and disease stage. Patients with undisclosed disease stage more often had higher QoL scores.

Background: The evaluation of quality of life and self-perceived health represents an assessment of the impact of treatment on patient functioning and well-being., Objective: Our aim was to explore the impact of methadone maintenance treatment on quality of life and self-perceived health of opioid-dependent persons in Lithuania., Methods: A total of 102 opioid-dependent patients were recruited in the study. A prospective follow-up study design was used. To assess quality of life, the WHOQOL-BREF 26-item version was used. The impact of methadone maintenance treatment on self-perceived health was assessed by Opiate Treatment Index (OTI)., Results: Following 6 months of methadone maintenance treatment, significant improvements in physical (P=0.004), psychological (P=0.004), and environmental (P=0.048) components of quality of life were observed; no statistically significant improvements were found in social component of quality of life. Study participants reported lower rates of medical morbidity associated with injection (P<0.001), cardiorespiratory (P=0.034), musculoskeletal (P<0.001), neurological (P=0.013), gastrointestinal (P<0.001), and general health (P<0.001)., Conclusions: Methadone maintenance treatment substantially reduces morbidity associated with opioid dependence and improves the quality of life of patients.

Quality of life measurements are increasingly incorporated into trials of pharmaceuticals. This can be applied to a wide range of medical areas including drug-addiction maintenance treatment programs. Maintenance treatment has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment for opioid addiction but still lacks quality of life specific measures to measure the maintenance program effects and until now there have been only few attempts to assess the impact of opioid dependence and its treatment on the drug-addicted patients' quality of life. The aim of this article is to describe quality of life concept, measurement instruments, selection criteria and its applicability in the drug addiction maintenance studies.