RESUMO
PURPOSE: Adults with a history of prostate cancer experience several physical and mental stressors. However, limited information is available about the prevalence of psychological distress in this population and its association with clinical outcomes in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: We identified adults with history of prostate cancer from a nationally representative cohort (2000-2018 US National Health Interview Survey) and its linked mortality files through December 31, 2019. The six-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) was used to assess psychological distress. The associations between psychological distress severity, emergency room (ER) usage, and mortality risk were estimated using multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards models, which were both adjusted for age, survey year, race/ethnicity, region, education, health insurance, comorbidities, functional limitations, and time since cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Among the 3,451 adults with history of prostate cancer surveyed, 96 (2.4%), 434 (11.3%), and 2,921 (86.3%) reported severe, moderate, or low/no mental distress, respectively. During the 12 months preceding the survey, 812 (22.8%) adults with history of prostate cancer visited the ER. After a median follow-up of 81 months, 937 (25.5%) deaths occurred. Compared with participants with low/no mental distress, those with severe mental distress reported the highest utilization of the ER (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.57 [95% CI, 1.51 to 4.37]) and exhibited the highest all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.83 [95% CI, 1.29 to 2.60]), followed by those with moderate mental distress (ER use aOR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.29 to 2.42]; all-cause mortality aHR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.62]). CONCLUSION: Among US adults with history of prostate cancer, psychological distress was associated with increased ER use and mortality risk. Notably, severe psychological distress was correlated with the highest rates of ER visits and mortality risk. However, given the retrospective nature of this study, uncontrolled confounding variables need to be considered when interpreting the findings.
