Abstract
Background
This study presented the utility across approaches (robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or open radical prostatectomy (ORP)), across disease states after surgery, and also across functional outcomes for localized prostate cancers. The utility was measured using the time trade-off method.
Methods
This survey was based on a scenario that describes the state of health in detail and considers surgical methods, short-term adverse effects following RP, disease-specific conditions, and additional treatments 1 year following RP.
Results
This study analyzed 393 men; the utility values are as follows: first, health status postoperatively showed that the utility value decreased in patients who underwent ORP versus those who underwent LRP. The utility value for ORP and LRP versus RARP was reduced by ~0.028 (10 days per year) and 0.008 (3 days per year), respectively. Second, the utility value based on adverse effects after RP indicated that erectile dysfunction caused a greater reduction in efficacy than urinary incontinence. Regarding erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence, the efficacy was reduced to ~0.137 (50 days per year) and 0.111 (41 days per year), respectively, as compared to a health state without adverse effects based on no evidence of disease status.
Conclusions
In conclusion, the disutility was much greater due to the side effects than the disutility due to the difference in the surgical method. In particular, the disutility of erectile dysfunction was bigger than that of the urinary incontinence.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 4 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $64.75 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
2013 National Health Insurance Service and Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service. http://www.nhis.or.kr/bbs7/boards/B0075/12434. Accessed 29 Aug 2017.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:E359–E386.
Han HH, Park JW, Na JC, Chung BH, Kim CS, Ko WJ. Epidemiology of prostate cancer in South Korea. Prostate Int. 2015;3:99–102.
Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Saloman J, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Kim YH, Hwang JS, Ahn JH, Lee SM, Lee YJ, Shin SJ. Utilities for prostate cancer by cancer stage and treatment period step in Korea. Korean J Health Econ Policy. 2013;19:1–20.
Lee SH, Kim JH, Hwang JS, Choi JE, Shine EH, Lee NR et al. Clinical effectiveness and safety of robotic surgery. Seoul: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA)2013; NECA-3-13-007.
Korfage IJ, de Koning HJ, Habbema JD, Schroder FH, Essink-Bot ML. Side-effects of treatment for localized prostate cancer: are they valued differently by patients and healthy controls? BJU Int. 2007;99:801–6.
Nelson CP, Routh JC, Logvinenko T, Rosoklija I, Kokorowski PJ, Prosser LA, et al. Utility scores for vesicoureteral reflux and anti-reflux surgery. J Pediatr Urol. 2015;11:177–82.
Funding
This study was funded by the National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency in Korea (NA14-002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Compliance with ethical standards
The present study protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of National Evidence-based Collaborating Agency (Reg. No. NECAIRB14-002).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Informed consent
Informed consent was submitted by all subjects when they were enrolled.
Additional information
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, MJ., Park, DA. & Lee, S. Utility after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to conventional approaches for localized prostate cancer [socioeconomic perspective study]. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 22, 461–466 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0119-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0119-9