Validation in Spain of the Quality of Life questionnaire PROSQOLI in patients with advanced prostate cancer

Use of Patient Assessed Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Prostate Cancer Research: A Systematic Review of the Literature 2002–15

“…Three (9 percent) of the articles came from Canada (35–37), and in addition all four multinational studies included Canadian patients (31–34). Four studies (12 percent) came from the United Kingdom (38–41), three (9 percent) from Finland (42–44), three from Japan (18;34;45), and one study (3 percent) from Norway (46), Spain (19), Turkey (47), the Netherlands (48), and Lithuania (49). The six multinational studies (31–34;40;41) included, in addition to the U.S. and Canadian patients mentioned above, patients from Australia, Argentina, Canada, France, Brazil, Germany, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Italy, Chile, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, Peru, Sweden, Russia, Israel, and Uruguay (Table 1 and Supplementary Table 1).…”

“…Of the thirty-three articles, twenty-four (73 percent) used an indirect valuation and sixteen (48 percent) a direct valuation method (some of the studies included instruments using both approaches). The most commonly used instrument was the EQ-5D, which was used in twenty-one (64 percent) studies (18;19;22;27;30–34;36;37;39–45;48;50). The VAS was also common as it was used in ten (30 percent) studies (19;28;29;32;37;38;43;44;48;49).…”

“…The impact of radical prostatectomy on HRQoL was studied in five of the articles (20;35;39;48;50), and the HRQoL scores after surgery varied between 0.68 and 0.91. For advanced or metastatic stage disease the HRQoL scores varied between 0.50 and 0.87 (18;19;22;23;26;27;31;33;34;40;41;43;44). The variance in HRQoL scores between the various disease stages is most probably also a consequence of variance in the HRQoL instruments used and variance in the study methods.…”

“…Of the reviewed studies, seventeen (52 percent) were longitudinal (18;21;22;25;27;30–34;36;37;39;40;42;46;48) and sixteen (48 percent) cross-sectional (19;20;23;24;26;28;29;35;38;41;43;44;45;47;49;50). In most of the longitudinal follow-up studies ( n = 15; 88 percent), an indirect instrument was used (18;22;27;30–34;36;37;39;40;42;46;48).…”

“…In most of the longitudinal follow-up studies ( n = 15; 88 percent), an indirect instrument was used (18;22;27;30–34;36;37;39;40;42;46;48). In contrast, most of the cross-sectional studies used a direct instrument to measure HRQoL ( n = 11; 69 percent) (19;20;23;24;26;28;29;38;43;44;49). Of the longitudinal follow-up studies, nine studies had a follow-up period equal to or less than 1 year (18;21;25;27;33;36;37;39;46), seven had a follow-up period of more than 1 year (30–34;40;42;48), and in one study the reporting concerning the follow-up period was not clear (22).…”