Quality of life in partners of patients with localised prostate cancer
- 580 Downloads
The diagnosis of prostate cancer and the following treatment does not only affect the patient, but also his partner. Partners often suffer even more severely from psychological distress than the patients themselves. This analysis aims to describe the quality of life (QoL) after the cancer diagnosis over time and to identify the effects of possible predictors of partners’ quality of life in a German study population.
Data and methods
Patients with localised prostate cancer and their partners were recruited from a prospective multicenter study in Germany, the Prostate Cancer, Sexuality, and Partnership (ProCaSP) Study. At five observation times during the follow-up period of 2 years after diagnosis, QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and personal, social, and cancer-related health factors as well as adaptation and coping factors of 293 couples were observed and analysed with mixed effects analysis.
The men’s prostate cancer diagnosis had a small, but significant impact on their partner’s QoL. However, QoL of partners was most affected by the partners’ own physical health and psychological condition, time, and their relationship quality.
The finding that average QoL increased again 3 months after diagnosis and later should give partners faith and hope for the future. The identified most important predictors of partners’ QoL are potentially susceptible to intervention, and further research on target groups in special need of support and on adequate interventions is needed.
KeywordsQuality of life Prostate cancer Partner Couple Mixed effects analysis
We thank the reviewers for their helpful contributions to the revision of the manuscript.
- 1.Robert Koch Institute and the Association of Population-based Cancer Registries in Germany (2012). Cancer in Germany 2007/2008. Incidence and trends, 8 ed. Berlin.Google Scholar
- 11.Applebaum, A. J., et al. (2013). Preliminary study of themes of meaning and psychosocial service use among informal cancer caregivers. Palliative & Supportive Care, 1–10. doi: 10.1017/S1478951513000084.
- 18.Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Berlin: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- 22.Wittekind, C., Meyer, H.-J., & Bootz, F. (Eds.). (2002). In UICC: TNM Klassifikation maligner Tumoren (6th ed). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- 24.Fayers, P., et al. (2001). The EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual (3rd ed.). Brussels: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer.Google Scholar
- 31.Rabin, R. et al. (2011). EQ-5D-3L User Guide. Basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-3L instrument. Version 4.0, EuroQol Group: Rotterdam.Google Scholar
- 33.R Development Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
- 34.van Buuren, S., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011). MICE: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1–67.Google Scholar
- 35.Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., & R Development Core Team. (2013). nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1-113.Google Scholar
- 36.Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2013). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 1.0-5. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.
- 37.Baayen, R. H. (2011). languageR: Data sets and functions with “Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics”. R package version 1.4. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=languageR.