RESUMEN
ABSTRACT Objectives: Prostate cancer is the most common and fatal cancer amongst Brazilian males. The quality of prostate cancer care in Brazil was systematically reviewed and compared to United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines, which are considered an international benchmark in care, to deter- mine any treatment gaps in Brazilian practice. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of Brazilian and UK literature was under- taken. Additionally, quality of life scores was measured using a FACT-P questionnaire of 36 prostate cancer patients attending the Farmácia Universitária da Universidade de São Paulo (FARMUSP). These scores were compared against NICE care measures for patient safety, clinical efficacy and quality of life indicators determined by either quantitative or qualitative methods. Key findings: The quality of prostate cancer care in Brazil was considered good when compared to NICE guidelines. However, FACT-P data strongly indicated a poor under- standing of treatment received by Brazilian patients and that their mental health needs were not being met. Conclusions: NICE quality statements that address the holistic needs of patients should be implemented into Brazilian outpatient care plans. Addressing the non-medical concerns of patients may improve quality of life and can be easily rolled-out through existing Brazilian pharmacy services at no financial cost to the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS).
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Servicios Farmacéuticos/normas , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/métodos , Calidad de Vida , Atención Ambulatoria/normas , Estándares de Referencia , Brasil , Encuestas y Cuestionarios/normas , Lista de Verificación/normas , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Prostate cancer is the most common and fatal cancer amongst Brazilian males. The quality of prostate cancer care in Brazil was systematically reviewed and compared to United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines, which are considered an international benchmark in care, to determine any treatment gaps in Brazilian practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of Brazilian and UK literature was undertaken. Additionally, quality of life scores was measured using a FACT-P questionnaire of 36 prostate cancer patients attending the Farmácia Universitária da Universidade de São Paulo (FARMUSP). These scores were compared against NICE care measures for patient safety, clinical effi cacy and quality of life indicators determined by either quantitative or qualitative methods. Key fi ndings: The quality of prostate cancer care in Brazil was considered good when compared to NICE guidelines. However, FACT-P data strongly indicated a poor understanding of treatment received by Brazilian patients and that their mental health needs were not being met. CONCLUSIONS: NICE quality statements that address the holistic needs of patients should be implemented into Brazilian outpatient care plans. Addressing the non-medical concerns of patients may improve quality of life and can be easily rolled-out through existing Brazilian pharmacy services at no fi nancial cost to the Brazilian Unifi ed Health System (SUS).