Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2233770816> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W2233770816 endingPage "46" @default.
- W2233770816 startingPage "37" @default.
- W2233770816 abstract "Review question/objective The objective of this review is to explore men's perceptions of the impact of the physical consequences of radical prostatectomy on their quality of life Background Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer and second most common cause of cancer death in men in the Western world.1 The quality of life of men with prostate cancer can be negatively affected by the various treatments available to them.2 Radical prostatectomy is the predominant primary treatment approach for prostate cancer in a number of countries including Australia and North America,3,4 and involves the complete removal of the prostate, seminal vesicles and surrounding tissues.5 Postoperative complications commonly occur and current literature reports issues concerning the bladder, bowel and sexual dysfunction.6 Each of these can be categorized as a physical consequence of the surgery and for radical prostatectomy such complications are urinary7,8 and fecal incontinence9 as well as sexual dysfunction.7 These physical consequences of surgery are intrinsically connected to psychosocial implications for the patient and are associated with significantly reduced quality of life.5,10 Urinary incontinence is a problem for at least 50% of men who undergo radical prostatectomy and this can have a negative effect on their postoperative quality of life.7-11 Men can experience negative feelings about dealing with indwelling catheters and urinary incontinence at home, and report anxiety, fear and embarrassment.11 as well as a loss of a sense of control, depression and decreased social interactions.8 Fecal incontinence is also reported to have a significant impact on men's self-confidence, personal image and social life.5,9 Sexual dysfunction following radical prostatectomy encompasses several physical issues including erectile dysfunction and impotence,12,13 which is one of the most common concerns of men post radical prostatectomy.14,15 A number of psychological and relationship implications have been highlighted,16 and many men do not know where to turn to for help.15 A less common physical issue following radical prostatectomy is penile length shortening.8 Yoko et al.8 suggest that, from the viewpoint of society and its preoccupation with penile size, physical reduction in penile length size following radical prostatectomy can negatively affect psychological well-being. An important clinical implication for understanding men's perceptions of the physical and psychosocial consequences of radical prostatectomy is that healthcare professionals working with these men can assist them in considering and discussing issues such as masculinity, erectile dysfunction and incontinence pre- and post-treatment, thereby increasing men's understanding and adaptation postoperatively.17,18 A national survey of cancer patients conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) in 1999/2000 identified that patients with prostate cancer often had a worse experience of supportive care than those diagnosed with and treated for other cancers.4 A second survey, conducted following the implementation of the NHS Cancer Plan,19 a program outlining the UK government's intentions to reform cancer care, was consistent with the results of the 1999/2000 survey and identified only the smallest improvement in the provision of care for patients with prostate cancer.20 A more recent survey21 identified improvement in the patient's perception of their experience of prostate cancer care. Even so, the care of people suffering from prostate cancer fell behind several other cancer groups (breast, lung and colorectal) on multiple elements of the survey, including definitive explanations of the potential side effects of treatment thereby highlighting scope for improvement in care provision. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for prostate cancer22 emphasizes the pivotal role of communication between healthcare professionals and men with prostate cancer. One of their key priorities is the healthcare professionals' role in providing evidence-based advice regarding the potential side effects of prostate cancer treatment and subsequent support that takes into account quality of life implications for these men. Treatment such as radical prostatectomy that has negative physical and psychosocial consequences that potentially impact on men's quality of life means it is increasingly becoming an important topic. Willener and Hantikainen23 suggest that improving quality of life should be the ultimate aim of any healthcare treatment or intervention, and the patient's experience of the treatment is paramount. In order to provide high quality care, healthcare professionals need to improve understanding of the physical and psychosocial implications of radical prostatectomy from the men's perspective.11 An improved understanding of the men's perspective of these physical consequences could potentially enhance the value and impact of support provided. The underpinning concept in this proposed review is to explore the repercussions on lifestyle and associated psychosocial impact that the outlined physical consequences have on men following radical prostatectomy. By identifying and exploring issues that affect men's quality of life, opportunities can be created to talk about problems, discuss issues and ultimately improve men's postoperative experiences. Nurses provide a vital role in ensuring that men are adequately prepared for radical prostatectomy and the potential implications on their postoperative quality of life.15 Without an in depth knowledge and understanding of men's experiences post radical prostatectomy, there is a risk that health professionals may be unable to provide the comprehensive support and information that is vital to men postoperatively. Numerous qualitative studies have been published exploring men's post radical prostatectomy surgery experiences14,15,18,24-28 and also those from the point of view of their spouses.6,29,30 Previous qualitative reviews in this area are limited and a search revealed only one narrative review of men's experiences of urinary incontinence after prostatectomy.11 The majority of systematic reviews conducted were quantitative, and they investigated health related quality of life following radical prostatectomy5,10 and the effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions on urinary and fecal incontinence and erectile dysfunction in men over 50 years and over after prostatectomy for prostate cancer in comparison to usual care.31 A systematic review exploring the findings of studies that specifically discuss the impact of the physical consequences of radical prostatectomy on their quality of life is essential to assist health care professionals in focusing on this area in future practice. To date no such systematic review has been conducted." @default.
- W2233770816 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2233770816 creator A5059352689 @default.
- W2233770816 creator A5086819608 @default.
- W2233770816 creator A5087563775 @default.
- W2233770816 date "2015-12-01" @default.
- W2233770816 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
- W2233770816 title "Menʼs perceptions of the impact of the physical consequences of radical prostatectomy on their quality of life: a qualitative systematic review protocol" @default.
- W2233770816 cites W1907014307 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W1942401264 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W1969800490 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W1976167877 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W1979898188 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W1996824833 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2003936756 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2008308958 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2025253620 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2027491457 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2038250806 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2058452247 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2064689678 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2065077636 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2077883357 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2078951354 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2110540113 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2113868668 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2115953163 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2156549595 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2158769661 @default.
- W2233770816 cites W2329065959 @default.
- W2233770816 doi "https://doi.org/10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2408" @default.
- W2233770816 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26767814" @default.
- W2233770816 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
- W2233770816 type Work @default.
- W2233770816 sameAs 2233770816 @default.
- W2233770816 citedByCount "4" @default.
- W2233770816 countsByYear W22337708162017 @default.
- W2233770816 countsByYear W22337708162018 @default.
- W2233770816 countsByYear W22337708162019 @default.
- W2233770816 countsByYear W22337708162022 @default.
- W2233770816 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2233770816 hasAuthorship W2233770816A5059352689 @default.
- W2233770816 hasAuthorship W2233770816A5086819608 @default.
- W2233770816 hasAuthorship W2233770816A5087563775 @default.
- W2233770816 hasBestOaLocation W22337708162 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C122980154 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C150966472 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2776716606 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2778093883 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2778531004 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2778660094 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2779466945 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2779951463 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C2780192828 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C542102704 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C558461103 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C118552586 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C121608353 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C122980154 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C126322002 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C126894567 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C150966472 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C15744967 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C159110408 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2776716606 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2778093883 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2778531004 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2778660094 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2779466945 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2779951463 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C2780192828 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C542102704 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C558461103 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C71924100 @default.
- W2233770816 hasConceptScore W2233770816C77805123 @default.
- W2233770816 hasIssue "12" @default.
- W2233770816 hasLocation W22337708161 @default.
- W2233770816 hasLocation W22337708162 @default.
- W2233770816 hasLocation W22337708163 @default.
- W2233770816 hasOpenAccess W2233770816 @default.
- W2233770816 hasPrimaryLocation W22337708161 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W1967410728 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W1994867266 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W2026113581 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W2064244225 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W2066794937 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W2087599513 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W2194737157 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W2407336872 @default.
- W2233770816 hasRelatedWork W3150909901 @default.