1. The expanded prostate cancer index composite short form (EPIC-26) for measuring health-related quality of life : content analysis of patients' spontaneous comments written in survey margins
- Author
-
Ilkka Pietilä, Hanna Ojala, Teuvo L.J. Tammela, Anna-Maija Talvitie, Tampere University, Health Sciences, Unit of Social Research, Department of Surgery, Clinical Medicine, Faculty Common Matters (Faculty of Social Sciences), Social Policy, Centre of Excellence in Research on Ageing and Care, and Helsinki Inequality Initiative (INEQ)
- Subjects
Male ,Quality of life ,Patient experience ,medicine.medical_specialty ,media_common.quotation_subject ,Sexual Behavior ,3122 Cancers ,education ,Affect (psychology) ,VALIDATION ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Quality of life (healthcare) ,Surveys and Questionnaires ,medicine ,The expanded prostate cancer index composite short form ,Humans ,030212 general & internal medicine ,media_common ,Prostate cancer ,INSTRUMENT ,Public health ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Prostatic Neoplasms ,Qualitative methods ,CARE ,3126 Surgery, anesthesiology, intensive care, radiology ,3142 Public health care science, environmental and occupational health ,3141 Health care science ,Content analysis ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,5141 Sociology ,Sexual function ,Psychology ,Diversity (politics) ,Clinical psychology ,Qualitative research - Abstract
Introduction This study investigates comments that prostate cancer patients spontaneously write in the margins of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Short Form (EPIC-26) questionnaire. We aim to show the possible barriers that patients face while answering the survey, and to consider how these barriers may affect the response data generated. We investigate the kind of information patients’ comments on EPIC-26 contain, and patients’ motivations to provide this information. We also study why some EPIC domains spark more comments than others. Method We analyzed 28 pages of transcribed comments and four pages of supplementary letters from our survey participants (n = 496). Using inductive content analysis, we generated 10 categories describing the content of participants’ comments, and four themes demonstrating their motives for commenting. The comments regarding each EPIC domain were quantified to discover any differences between domains. Results The sexual domain of EPIC-26 provoked over half of all comments. Patients without recent sexual activity or desire had difficulties answering sexual function questions 8–10. The lack of instructions on whether to take erectile aid use into account when answering erectile function questions led to a diversity of answering strategies. Patients with urinary catheters could not find suitable answer options for questions 1–4. All domains sparked comments containing additional information about experienced symptoms. Conclusion Patients are mainly willing to report their symptoms, but a lack of suitable answer options causes missing data and differing answering strategies in the sexual and urinary domains of EPIC-26, weakening the quality of the response data received.
- Published
- 2021