Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Apr;19(4):339-48.
doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30046.x.

Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment

Robert J Volk  1 , Scott B Cantor, Alvah R Cass, Stephen J Spann, Susan C Weller, Murray D Krahn
Affiliations

Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment

Robert J Volk et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Apr.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the preferences of male primary care patients and their spouses for the outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment, and quality of life with metastatic prostate cancer.

Design: Cross-sectional design.

Setting: Primary care clinics in Galveston County, Texas.

Patients: One hundred sixty-eight couples in which the husband was a primary care patient and a candidate for prostate cancer screening.

Measurements and main results: Preferences were measured as utilities for treatment outcomes and quality of life with metastatic disease by the time trade-off method for the husband and the wife individually and then conjointly for the couple. For each health state considered, husbands associated lower utilities for the health states than did their wives. Couples' utilities fell between those of husbands and wives (all comparisons were significant at P <.01). For partial and complete impotence and mild-to-moderate incontinence, the median utility value for the wives was 1.0, indicating that most wives did not associate disutility with their husbands having to experience these treatment complications.

Conclusions: Male primary care patients who are candidates for prostate cancer screening evaluate the outcomes of prostate cancer treatment and life with advanced prostate cancer as being far worse than do their wives. Because the choice between quantity and quality of life is a highly individualistic one, both the patient and his partner should be involved in making decisions about prostate cancer screening. J

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Boxplots of utilities for health states elicited from three perspectives (husband, wife, couple).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2002. Atlanta, Ga: 2002.
    1. von Eschenbach A, Ho R, Murphy GP, Cunningham M, Lins N. American Cancer Society Guideline for early detection of prostate cancer: update 1997. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997;47:261–4. - PubMed
    1. American Urological Association. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) best practice policy. Oncology (Huntingt) 2000;14:267–72. 77–8, 280 passim. - PubMed
    1. Barry MJ, Fleming C, Coley CM, Wasson JH, Fahs MC, Oesterling JE. Should Medicare provide reimbursement for prostate-specific antigen testing for early detection of prostate cancer? Part I: framing the debate. Urology. 1995;46:2–13. - PubMed
    1. Lu-Yao G, Albertsen PC, Stanford JL, Stukel TA, Walker-Corkery ES, Barry MJ. Natural experiment examining impact of aggressive screening and treatment on prostate cancer mortality in two fixed cohorts from Seattle area and Connecticut. BMJ. 2002;325:740. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types