Impact of a pharmacist-led intervention on prostate cancer illness perception.

Abstract

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Illness perception (IP) significantly determines illness outcomes. This study determined the impact of a pharmacist educational intervention on IP in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and predictors of IP. Using a brief IP questionnaire, an interventional study of patients with PCa was conducted in all cancer reference hospitals in one Nigerian state. After a pre-post assessment of patients' IP, descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed. The impact of pharmacists' intervention on IP was determined by paired-sample statistics and correlation analysis at the 95% CI. Relationships and predictors of IP were determined using Kendall's tau-b (τb), likelihood ratio, and F tests of equality of means, respectively. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Pharmacists' educational intervention significantly improved IP (SEM, 0.13; r = 0.875; P < 0.0001) among the 200 participants. The analyses also showed a significant paired sample difference (2.662; SEM, 0.06; 95%CI, 2.536-2.788; t = 41.69; df = 199; P < 0.0001). All subscales of patients' IP significantly improved except for illness consequences (P = 0.173) and identity (mean [SD], 4.40 [3.730] in both pre- and postintervention assessments). Pre- and postintervention assessments showed a significant negative relationship of IP with age (τb = -110 [P = 0.040] and τb = -14 [P = 0.021], respectively), Gleason score (τb = -0.125 [P = 0.021] and τb = -0.124 [P=0.012], respectively), and age at diagnosis (τb = -0.103 [P = 0.036] post intervention). IP was significantly dependent on the drug therapy (df = 8; mean square [M] = 6.292; F = 2.825; P = 0.006), alcohol intake (df = 1; M = 9.608; F = 4.082; P = 0.045) and Gleason score (df = 9; M = 6.706; F = 3.068; P = 0.002). Patients' IP significantly improved after pharmacists' educational intervention. Predictors of IP were drug therapies, alcohol use and Gleason score. Findings can be extrapolated in clinical settings to improve treatment outcomes.