Interpreting Patient Reported Urinary and Sexual Function Outcomes across Multiple Validated Instruments
- PMID: 28342935
- PMCID: PMC5636214
- DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.03.121
Interpreting Patient Reported Urinary and Sexual Function Outcomes across Multiple Validated Instruments
Abstract
Purpose: Comparing patient reported outcomes such as urinary and erectile function across institutions is critical for prostate cancer research and quality assurance. Such comparisons are complicated due to the use of different questionnaires. We aimed to develop a method to convert scores among 4 commonly used instruments.
Materials and methods: Patient reported data on urinary and sexual function were collected on 1,284 men with localized prostate cancer using the EPIC-26 (Expanded Prostate Index Composite), PCI (UCLA Prostate Cancer Index), SHIM (Sexual Health Inventory for Men) and I-PSS (International Prostate Symptom Scale) questionnaires. We investigated several methods to convert scores among questionnaires.
Results: Conversion between EPIC and PCI urinary and sexual function subscales was best achieved using only the subset of questions asked on both questionnaires. For the conversion between EPIC or PCI erectile function scores and SHIM scores, we defined thresholds of poor, intermediate and good function as EPIC/PCI 0 to 40 and SHIM 1 to 7, EPIC/PCI 41 to 59 and SHIM 8 to 16, and EPIC/PCI 60 to 100 and SHIM 17 to 25, respectively. Urinary continence scores highly correlated for PCI and EPIC (r = 0.94). No comparison was possible for I-PSS with EPIC and PCI due to differences in the domains addressed by these questionnaires.
Conclusions: We have introduced methods to convert scores among the EPIC, PCI and SHIM questionnaires. While these conversion methods may introduce minor imprecision, to our knowledge they represent the best available tools to combine and compare patient reported outcomes that are assessed using different instruments in men undergoing radical prostatectomy or active surveillance.
Keywords: erectile dysfunction; patient outcome assessment; prostatic neoplasms; surveys and questionnaires; urinary incontinence.
Copyright © 2017 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
There are no conflicts of interest.
Figures





References
-
- Martin NE, Massey L, Stowell C, et al. Defining a standard set of patient-centered outcomes for men with localized prostate cancer. European urology. 2015 Mar;67(3):460–467. - PubMed
-
- Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS, Sandler HM, Sanda MG. Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology. 2000 Dec 20;56(6):899–905. - PubMed
-
- Ramanathan R, Mulhall J, Rao S, et al. Predictive correlation between the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM): implications for calculating a derived SHIM for clinical use. The journal of sexual medicine. 2007 Sep;4(5):1336–1344. - PubMed
-
- Namiki S, Takegami M, Kakehi Y, Suzukamo Y, Fukuhara S, Arai Y. Analysis linking UCLA PCI with Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite: an evaluation of health related quality of life in Japanese men with localized prostate cancer. The Journal of urology. 2007 Aug;178(2):473–477. discussion 477. - PubMed
-
- Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. The Journal of urology. 2007 Jun;177(6):2106–2131. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous