ObjectivesTo summarize black and minority ethnic (BME) patients' and partners experiences of prostate cancer by examining the findings of existing qualitative studies.MethodsWe undertook a systematic metasynthesis of qualitative studies using a modified version of Noblit and Hare's “meta‐ethnography” approach, with a 2000‐2015 search of 7 databases.ResultsThirteen studies of men from US and UK BME groups were included. We explored constructs with BME‐specific features. Health care provider relationships, formation of a spiritual alliance with God (which enhanced the participants' feeling of empowerment and ability to cope with the cancer), and living on for others (generally to increase cancer awareness), often connected to spiritual regrowth, were the 3 constructs most commonly reported. A magnified effect from erectile dysfunction was also common. Initially, this affected men's disclosure to others about their cancer and their sexual problems, but eventually men responded by shifting their conceptualizations of masculinity to sustain self and social identities. There was also evidence of inequality resulting from financial constraints and adversity that necessitated resilience in coping.ConclusionsThe prostate cancer experience of BME men and their partners is affected by a complex intersection of ethnicity with other factors. Health care services should acknowledge this. If providers recognize the men's felt masculinities, social identities, and spiritual beliefs and their shifting nature, services could be improved, with community as well as individual benefits. More studies are needed in diverse ethnic groups.

PCa affects both members of the dyad as individuals, as well as the couple's relationship. How best to support couples and how to overcome difficulties in expressing their concerns to one another requires further consideration. Healthcare professionals should endeavour to employ a couple-focused approach where appropriate.

ObjectivesTo provide data on the prevalence of urinary, bowel and sexual dysfunction in Northern Ireland (NI), to act as a baseline for studies of prostate cancer outcomes and to aid service provision within the general population.Subjects and MethodsA cross‐sectional postal survey of 10 000 men aged ≥40 years in NI was conducted and age‐matched to the distribution of men living with prostate cancer. The EuroQoL five Dimensions five Levels (EQ‐5D‐5L) and 26‐item Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite (EPIC‐26) instruments were used to enable comparisons with prostate cancer outcome studies. Whilst representative of the prostate cancer survivor population, the age‐distribution of the sample differs from the general population, thus data were generalised to the NI population by excluding those aged 40–59 years and applying survey weights. Results are presented as proportions reporting problems along with mean composite scores, with differences by respondent characteristics assessed using chi‐squared tests, analysis of variance, and multivariable log‐linear regression.ResultsAmongst men aged ≥60 years, 32.8% reported sexual dysfunction, 9.3% urinary dysfunction, and 6.5% bowel dysfunction. In all, 38.1% reported at least one problem and 2.1% all three. Worse outcome was associated with increasing number of long‐term conditions, low physical activity, and higher body mass index (BMI). Urinary incontinence, urinary irritation/obstruction, and sexual dysfunction increased with age; whilst urinary incontinence, bowel, and sexual dysfunction were more common among the unemployed.ConclusionThese data provide an insight into sensitive issues seldom reported by elderly men, which result in poor general health, but could be addressed given adequate service provision. The relationship between these problems, raised BMI and low physical activity offers the prospect of additional health gain by addressing public health issues such as obesity. The results provide essential contemporary population data against which outcomes for those living with prostate cancer can be compared. They will facilitate greater understanding of the true impact of specific treatments such as surgical interventions, pelvic radiation or androgen‐deprivation therapy.

BackgroundProstate cancer and its treatment may impact physically, psychologically and socially; affecting the health-related quality of life of men and their partners/spouses. The Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (LAPCD) study is a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study which will generate information to improve the health and well-being of men with prostate cancer.Methods and analysisPostal surveys will be sent to prostate cancer survivors (18–42 months postdiagnosis) in all 4 UK countries (n=∼70 000). Eligible men will be identified and/or verified through cancer registration systems. Men will be surveyed twice, 12 months apart, to explore changes in outcomes over time. Second, separate cohorts will be surveyed once and the design will include evaluation of the acceptability of online survey tools. A comprehensive patient-reported outcome measure has been developed using generic and specific instruments with proven psychometric properties and relevance in national and international studies. The outcome data will be linked with administrative health data (eg, treatment information from hospital data). To ensure detailed understanding of issues of importance, qualitative interviews will be undertaken with a sample of men who complete the survey across the UK (n=∼150) along with a small number of partners/spouses (n=∼30).Ethics and disseminationThe study has received the following approvals: Newcastle and North Tyneside 1 Research Ethics Committee (15/NE/0036), Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (15/CAG/0110), NHS Scotland Public Benefit and Privacy Panel (0516-0364), Office of Research Ethics Northern Ireland (16/NI/0073) and NHS R&D approval from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Using traditional and innovative methods, the results will be made available to men and their partners/spouses, the funders, the NHS, social care, voluntary sector organisations and other researchers.

Objective: To explore adjustment strategies adopted by Black African (BA) and Black Caribbean (BC) men in the UK as a response to the impact of PCa diagnosis and treatment effects. Methods: Men were recruited through the UK-wide 'Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis' (LAPCD) survey. Telephone interviews were conducted with men (n=14) with BA and BC backgrounds between 18-42 months post-diagnosis. Data were analysed using a Framework approach. Results: Most men (n=12) were born outside the UK, were married (n=9) and employed (n=9). Median age was 66 years (range: 55-85). Six overarching themes emerged: a strong reliance upon faith beliefs; maintaining a 'positive' front; work as distraction; non-disclosure of diagnosis even amongst family members, influenced by stigma and masculinity concerns; active awareness-raising amongst a minority, and; support-seeking from close community. A few men emphasised a need to 'pitch' awareness-raising messages appropriately. Potential links existed between faith beliefs, presenting a positive front, community support-seeking and local awareness-raising. Conclusion: The provision of patient-centred care requires cultural sensitivity. Interventions that challenge stigma and mens' reluctance to disclose problems associated with PCa and treatment may encourage help-seeking for symptom support. Research is needed to determine how best awareness-raising messages should be conveyed to black men.