15250-m-cuypers

31 Decision role preferences and information satisfaction 2 2.2.4 Evaluation of information received The evaluation of information received was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 questionnaire 21 . The EORTC QLQ-INFO25 consists of four subscales which assess the perceived receipt of information about (i) the disease; (ii) medical tests; (iii) treatment, and (iv) other care services. Additionally, eight single items assess the receipt of information in different formats (e.g. written information, information on CDs or tape/ video), evaluation of the amount of information and satisfaction with the amount and helpfulness of information. All responses were given on a four-point Likert scale (1- not at all, 2-a little, 3-quite a bit, 4-very much), except for four single items that have a binary yes/no scale. Subscales were converted to a 0-100 outcome. Reliability of the full scale (α >.91) was excellent, subscale reliability (range between α=.74 and α =.89) was acceptable to good. 2.2.5 Health-related Quality of Life We used a general measure for health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in cancer patients (EORTC QLQ C30) and supplemented this with a Pca specific module (EORTC QLQ PR25) 22, 23 . Both scales were used to assess functional outcomes and symptom burden, as a previous study reported a negative correlation between HRQol and satisfaction with information received 14 . All responses were given on a four-point Likert scale (1- not at all, 2-a little, 3-quite a bit, 4-very much), except for two single items evaluating Global health on a seven-point scale. Subscales were converted to a 0-100 outcome. Reliability of the full C30 was excellent (α >.92), for the full PR25 scale reliability was good (α >.77), subscale reliability (range between α=.63 and α =.91) was good. Three symptom scales (Nausea, Bowel, Hormonal) and one functional scale (Sexual functioning) were excluded for further analysis because of poor internal consistency (α <.60) 2.3 Statistical analyses Patient and tumor characteristics were compared between decision-making role preference groups by using analyses of variance (ANOVAs) for continuous variables and chi-square analyses for categorical variables. Mean scores on the EORTC-QLQ-INFO25 and HRQoL-scales for different decision-making role preference groups were compared using ANOVA and LSD post hoc-tests or chi-square analyses for dichotomous items. Independent sample t-tests were conducted to investigate potential differences in satisfaction with information received between the two tumor stage groups (cT1 and cT2). For all EORTC-INFO-25 subscales linear regression analyses were carried out to investigate the association of these scales with decision-making role preference groups, controlling for age and educational level as being previously identified variables associated with role preferences 5 . As we assumed, received information could be