No abstract

No abstract

Focus groups as a data collection method in qualitative research have been used for several decades with great effect. Recent developments in online mechanisms for communication have prompted several researchers to explore alternate means of facilitating focus group participation. However, much of the online focus group literature has explored the use of text-based communication; there are few reports on the application of real-time online video-enabled software. In this article, we seek to inform the growing use of online-meeting software-mediated focus groups by reporting and analyzing its application within the context of a health workforce study among geographically dispersed radiation therapy professionals.

No abstract

Objective: To assess the psychosocial impact of the diagnosis of either localised or metastatic prostate cancer (PCA) on patients and their female partners. Design: Observational, prospective study at Time 1 and 6 months later at Time 2 of two groups of couples facing PCA. Time 1 was when patients were first diagnosed with histologically confirmed localised (potentially curable) PCA or metastatic (incurable) PCA. Main outcome measures: Depression and anxiety disorders according to the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders 4th edition (DSM‐IV); psychological distress; marital satisfaction. Results: At Time 1, partners had rates of DSM‐IV major depression and generalised anxiety disorder twice those of women in the Australian community, and considerably higher than the patients’ rates. At Time 2, psychological distress in partners had lessened but that in patients had increased. On the other hand, at Time 2, partners’ marital satisfaction had deteriorated. Conclusions: To be fully effective, interventions aimed at reducing the psychosocial morbidity of PCA must involve both patient and partner, rather than the patient alone.

Objectives To test the hypothesis that observation with early salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is not inferior to ‘standard’ treatment with adjuvant RT (ART) with respect to biochemical failure in patients with pT3 disease and/or positive surgical margins (SMs) after radical prostatectomy (RP). To compare the following secondary endpoints between the two arms: patient‐reported outcomes, adverse events, biochemical failure‐free survival, overall survival, disease‐specific survival, time to distant failure, time to local failure, cost utility analysis, quality adjusted life years and time to androgen deprivation. Patients and Methods The Radiotherapy – Adjuvant Versus Early Salvage (RAVES) trial is a phase III multicentre randomised controlled trial led by the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG), in collaboration with the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand (USANZ), and the Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group (ANZUP). In all, 470 patients are planned to be randomised 1:1 to either ART commenced at ≤4 months of RP (standard of care) or close observation with early SRT triggered by a PSA level of >0.20 ng/mL (experimental arm). Eligible patients have had a RP for adenocarcinoma of the prostate with at least one of the following risk factors: positive SMs ± extraprostatic extension ± seminal vesicle involvement. The postoperative PSA level must be ≤0.10 ng/mL. Rigorous investigator credentialing and a quality assurance programme are designed to promote consistent RT delivery among patients. Results Trial is currently underway, with 258 patients randomised as of 31 October 2013. International collaborations have developed, including a planned meta‐analysis to be undertaken with the UK Medical Research Council/National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group RADICALS (Radiotherapy and Androgen Deprivation In Combination with Local Surgery) trial and an innovative psycho‐oncology sub‐study to investigate a patient decision aid resource. Conclusion On the current evidence available, it remains unclear if ART is equivalent or superior to observation with early SRT.

No abstract

Objective: To assess psychosocial distress in patients with early (localised) and advanced (metastatic) prostate cancer (PCA) at diagnosis (Time 1) and 12 months later (Time 2), and identify psychosocial factors predictive of later distress. Design, participants and setting: Observational, prospective study of 367 men with early (211) or advanced (156) PCA recruited as consecutive attendees at clinics at seven public hospitals and practices in metropolitan Melbourne between 1 April 2001 and 30 December 2005. Both groups completed questionnaires at Time 1 and Time 2. Main outcome measures: Health‐related quality of life as assessed by the Short Form 36‐item Health Survey; psychological distress, including depression and anxiety as assessed by the Brief Symptom Inventory; and coping patterns as assessed by the Mini‐Mental Adjustment to Cancer scale. Results: Over the 12 months, both the early and advanced PCA group showed reduced vitality and increased depression and anxiety; this effect was greater in the advanced PCA group. Mental health, social functioning and role‐emotional functioning also deteriorated in the advanced group. Predictors of depression at Time 2 for the early PCA group were depression, vitality and a fatalistic coping pattern at Time 1; anxiety at Time 2 was predicted by anxiety and vitality at Time 1. In the advanced PCA group, depression at Time 2 was predicted by depression and mental health at Time 1; anxiety at Time 2 was predicted by anxiety, mental health, cognitive avoidance and lower anxious preoccupation at Time 1. Conclusions: Men with early PCA experience decreasing vitality and increasing psychological distress over the 12 months following diagnosis; this trend is accelerated after diagnosis with advanced PCA. A fatalistic coping pattern at diagnosis of early PCA predicts later depression while cognitive avoidance and lower anxious preoccupation at diagnosis of advanced PCA predict later anxiety.