Use of psycho-oncological services by prostate cancer patients: A multilevel analysis.


Journal

Cancer medicine
ISSN: 2045-7634
Titre abrégé: Cancer Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101595310

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2020
Historique:
received: 07 01 2020
revised: 21 02 2020
accepted: 03 03 2020
pubmed: 2 4 2020
medline: 14 5 2021
entrez: 2 4 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Cancer patients often suffer from psychological distress. Psycho-oncological services (POS) have been established in some health care systems in order to address such issues. This study aims to identify patient and center characteristics that elucidate the use of POS by patients in prostate cancer centers (PCCs). Center-reported certification and patient survey data from 3094 patients in 44 certified PCCs in Germany were gathered in the observational study (Prostate Cancer Outcomes). A multilevel analysis was conducted. Model 1 showed that utilization of POS in PCCs is associated with patients' age (OR = 0.98; 95%-CI = 0.96-0.99; P < .001), number of comorbidities (1-2 vs 0, OR = 1.27; 95%-CI = 1.00-1.60; P=.048), disease staging (localized high-risk vs localized intermediate risk, OR = 1.41; 95%-CI = 1.14-1.74; P < .001), receiving androgen deprivation therapy before study inclusion (OR = 0.19; 95%-CI = 0.10-0.34; P < .001), and hospital teaching status (university vs academic, OR = 0.09; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.55; P = .009). Model 2 additionally includes information on treatment after study inclusion and shows that after inclusion, patients who receive primary radiotherapy (OR = 0.05; 95%-CI = 0.03-0.10; P < .001) or undergo active surveillance/watchful waiting (OR = 0.06; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.15; P < .001) are less likely to utilize POS than patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. Disease staging (localized high-risk vs localized intermediate risk, OR = 1.31; 95%-CI = 1.05-1.62; P = .02) and teaching status (university vs academic, OR = 0.08; 95%-CI = 0.01-0.65; P = .02) are also significant predictors for POS use. The second model did not identify any other significant patient characteristics. Future research should explore the role of institutional teaching status and whether associations with therapy after study inclusion are due to treatment effects - for example, less need following radiotherapy - or because access to POS is more difficult for those receiving radiotherapy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Cancer patients often suffer from psychological distress. Psycho-oncological services (POS) have been established in some health care systems in order to address such issues. This study aims to identify patient and center characteristics that elucidate the use of POS by patients in prostate cancer centers (PCCs).
METHODS
Center-reported certification and patient survey data from 3094 patients in 44 certified PCCs in Germany were gathered in the observational study (Prostate Cancer Outcomes). A multilevel analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
Model 1 showed that utilization of POS in PCCs is associated with patients' age (OR = 0.98; 95%-CI = 0.96-0.99; P < .001), number of comorbidities (1-2 vs 0, OR = 1.27; 95%-CI = 1.00-1.60; P=.048), disease staging (localized high-risk vs localized intermediate risk, OR = 1.41; 95%-CI = 1.14-1.74; P < .001), receiving androgen deprivation therapy before study inclusion (OR = 0.19; 95%-CI = 0.10-0.34; P < .001), and hospital teaching status (university vs academic, OR = 0.09; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.55; P = .009). Model 2 additionally includes information on treatment after study inclusion and shows that after inclusion, patients who receive primary radiotherapy (OR = 0.05; 95%-CI = 0.03-0.10; P < .001) or undergo active surveillance/watchful waiting (OR = 0.06; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.15; P < .001) are less likely to utilize POS than patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. Disease staging (localized high-risk vs localized intermediate risk, OR = 1.31; 95%-CI = 1.05-1.62; P = .02) and teaching status (university vs academic, OR = 0.08; 95%-CI = 0.01-0.65; P = .02) are also significant predictors for POS use. The second model did not identify any other significant patient characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS
Future research should explore the role of institutional teaching status and whether associations with therapy after study inclusion are due to treatment effects - for example, less need following radiotherapy - or because access to POS is more difficult for those receiving radiotherapy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32233081
doi: 10.1002/cam4.2999
pmc: PMC7286449
doi:

Substances chimiques

Androgen Antagonists 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Observational Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

3680-3690

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

World J Urol. 2016 May;34(5):665-72
pubmed: 26391484
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2015 May;65(5):177-82
pubmed: 25485601
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Nov 1;32(31):3540-6
pubmed: 25287821
Cancer. 2016 Nov 15;122(22):3538-3545
pubmed: 27481151
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2010 Nov;19(6):736-45
pubmed: 19832893
Psychooncology. 2012 Oct;21(10):1027-33
pubmed: 23027723
Psychooncology. 2015 Dec;24(12):1686-93
pubmed: 25753507
Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2015 Aug;19(4):336-42
pubmed: 25800658
Cancer. 2009 Nov 15;115(22):5349-61
pubmed: 19753617
N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13;375(15):1425-1437
pubmed: 27626365
Psychooncology. 2013 Jun;22(6):1435-7
pubmed: 22855347
World J Urol. 2020 Feb 10;:
pubmed: 32040715
Eur Urol. 2015 Mar;67(3):460-7
pubmed: 25234359
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2017 Mar;26(2):
pubmed: 27111695
Psychooncology. 2017 Apr;26(4):537-543
pubmed: 27327213
BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 28;7(11):e017006
pubmed: 29183925
Eur J Cancer. 2018 Nov;103:356-387
pubmed: 30100160
World J Urol. 2019 Sep 24;:
pubmed: 31552467
Cancer Med. 2020 Jun;9(11):3680-3690
pubmed: 32233081
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 2;12(3):e0173266
pubmed: 28253340
BJU Int. 2018 Sep;122(3):401-410
pubmed: 29603553
Psychooncology. 2013 Apr;22(4):745-55
pubmed: 22411485
J Psychosom Res. 2008 Apr;64(4):383-91
pubmed: 18374737
Psychooncology. 2010 Feb;19(2):141-9
pubmed: 19382112

Auteurs

Clara Breidenbach (C)

German Cancer Society, Berlin, Germany.

Rebecca Roth (R)

Institute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology (IMSB), Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Koln, Germany.

Lena Ansmann (L)

Organizational Health Services Research, Department for Health Services Research, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.

Simone Wesselmann (S)

German Cancer Society, Berlin, Germany.

Sebastian Dieng (S)

OnkoZert GmbH, Neu-Ulm, Germany.

Ernst-Günther Carl (EG)

Federal Association of German Prostate Cancer Patient Support Groups, Bonn, Germany.

Günter Feick (G)

Federal Association of German Prostate Cancer Patient Support Groups, Bonn, Germany.

Alisa Oesterle (A)

OnkoZert GmbH, Neu-Ulm, Germany.

Peter Bach (P)

Kliniken Rhein-Ruhr, Herne, Germany.

Burkhard Beyer (B)

Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.

Rainer Borowitz (R)

Klinikum Memmingen, Memmingen, Germany.

Jörg Erdmann (J)

Caritas-Krankenhaus, Bad Mergentheim, Germany.

Frank Kunath (F)

University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.

Simba-Joshua Oostdam (SJ)

KRH Klinikum Siloah, Hannover, Germany.

Igor Tsaur (I)

University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.

Friedemann Zengerling (F)

University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.

Christoph Kowalski (C)

German Cancer Society, Berlin, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH