Evidence Hub

Neutral third party versus treating institution for evaluating quality of life after radical cystectomy

Månsson A, Henningsohn L, Steineck G, Månsson W

European urology, 2004

119 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the possible impact of a neutral third party on the patients' responses to health-related quality of life (HRQL) instruments.

METHODS: 119 patients operated at the Department of Urology in Lund with radical cystectomy and continent urinary tract reconstruction (continent cutaneous diversion or orthotopic bladder substitution) for locally advanced bladder cancer were included in the study. They were randomly divided in two groups, similar with regard to gender, age, length of follow-up, and type of reconstruction. The EORTC instruments QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BLM30 were sent to the patients. One group; "Lund patients", received the instruments from the Department of Urology in Lund, while the other group; "Stockholm patients", received the instruments from a neutral third party, i.e. "The Project Health and Well-Being" at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm.

RESULTS: Response rates were high in both groups, 59 out of 60 among Lund patients and 57 out of 59 among Stockholm patients. There were statistically significantly more bowel problems reported in the Stockholm patients than in the Lund patients (p<0.05) in the QLQ-C30 instrument. Regarding type of reconstruction, the Stockholm patients with continent cutaneous diversion scored higher for constipation than the Lund patients (p<0.05), and the Stockholm patients with bladder substitution scored lower for emotional functioning and higher for dyspnoea and economical problems than the Lund patients (p<0.05.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 119 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free