Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Urol. 2015 Sep 3;195(2):321–329. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.08.092

Table 3.

Multivariable linear regression models for domain summary scores by time of survey

Urinary Function Summary Scores
Sexual Function Summary Scores*
6 Mos
12 Mos
6 Mos
12 Mos
Coefficient p Value Coefficient p Value Coefficient p Value Coefficient p Value
Surgery: RALP vs RRP 3.77 0.005 1.20 0.35 8.31 <0.001 7.64 <0.001
Baseline function (10 pts) 0.61 0.21 1.87 <0.001 1.20 <0.001 1.54 <0.001
Interactions
Surgery-baseline function (10 pts) 1.96 0.003 0.55 0.39 1.43 <0.001 2.01 <0.001
Age-10 yrs, continuous −2.78 0.001 −2.63 0.001 −1.43 0.06 −3.22 <0.001
Race: white vs other 0.75 0.56 −0.06 0.96 −0.33 0.76 −0.65 0.58
Income vs less than $30,000:
 $30,000–$100,000 −0.80 0.59 −0.26 0.86 −1.13 0.39 −0.12 0.93
 Greater than $100,000 3.17 0.09 3.12 0.08 1.75 0.28 1.34 0.45
General health vs excellent:
 Poor −23.59 <0.001 −24.22 <0.001 −12.15 0.002 −15.94 <0.001
 Fair −6.04 0.008 −6.95 0.002 −5.83 0.003 −10.83 <0.001
 Good −9.38 <0.001 −9.91 <0.001 −4.57 <0.001 −4.15 0.001
 Very good −2.67 0.03 −4.17 <0.001 −1.75 0.09 −3.16 0.004

Adjusted for education, marital and health insurance status, study site, days since treatment, PSA, Gleason score, margin and nerve sparing status, pathological stage, and use of androgen deprivation.

*

Also adjusted for use of erectile dysfunction treatments.

Refers to baseline summary scores for respective functional domains.