Premium
Quality of life, anxiety and depression patient‐reported outcome measures in testicular cancer: A systematic review
Author(s) -
Dincer Amine Nur,
Brunckhorst Oliver,
Genel Oktay,
Dasgupta Prokar,
Muneer Asif,
Ahmed Kamran
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
psycho‐oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.41
H-Index - 137
eISSN - 1099-1611
pISSN - 1057-9249
DOI - 10.1002/pon.5700
Subject(s) - depression (economics) , anxiety , testicular cancer , clinical psychology , quality of life (healthcare) , outcome (game theory) , psychology , quality (philosophy) , medicine , cancer , psychiatry , psychotherapist , economics , macroeconomics , philosophy , mathematics , mathematical economics , epistemology
Objectives Several patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are available for the assessment of quality of life (QoL), anxiety and depression for testicular cancer (TCa); however, these PROMs have uncertain validation of their psychometric properties for TCa‐only cohorts. This systematic review aims to critically analyse and evaluate the psychometric properties of these QoL, anxiety and depression PROMs. Methods PubMed, EMBASE and PsycInfo were searched by two independent reviewers from inception to August 2020. Evaluative studies that assessed measurement properties of PROM(s) tools used for measuring QoL, anxiety and depression in TCa patients were included. The COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) updated criteria for good measurement properties were used in the evaluation of PROM psychometric quality. This systematic review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020160232). Results Of 4,305 abstracts screened, a final eight full‐text articles were included in this review. Five general and two TCa‐specific PROMs were identified (depression, n = 1; anxiety and depression, n = 2; QoL, n = 4). All studies were incomplete in the validation of nine measurement properties and the modal methodological quality was ‘indeterminate’. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality ‐Testicular Cancer 26 questionnaire and CAYA‐T had the highest psychometric validation with three out of nine measurement properties being ‘sufficient’. Conclusion This systematic review identifies a paucity of PROM‐validation studies assessing anxiety, depression and QoL in TCa‐only cohorts. We recommend further comprehensive and standardised psychometric validation studies of QoL, anxiety and depression PROMs in TCa‐only study populations.