MP02-16 CAN GENITOURINARY CANCER SURVIVORS UNDERSTAND QUALITY OF LIFE (QoL) QUESTIONNAIRES? ASSESSING THE READABILITY OF COMMONLY USED UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY QoL INSTRUMENTS

You have accessJournal of UrologyHealth Services Research: Quality Improvement & Patient Safety I (MP02)1 May 2024MP02-16 CAN GENITOURINARY CANCER SURVIVORS UNDERSTAND QUALITY OF LIFE (QoL) QUESTIONNAIRES? ASSESSING THE READABILITY OF COMMONLY USED UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY QoL INSTRUMENTS Hannah Kay, Tracy Rose, Matthew Milowsky, Angela Smith, and Marc Bjurlin Hannah KayHannah Kay , Tracy RoseTracy Rose , Matthew MilowskyMatthew Milowsky , Angela SmithAngela Smith , and Marc BjurlinMarc Bjurlin View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008600.97797.3b.16AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Quality of Life (QoL) is an important outcome in cancer care. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has developed questionnaires to assess QoL in cancer survivors. Survey measurements assume participant comprehension of the questions being asked. Our primary aim was to evaluate the readability of EORTC QoL questionnaires related to urologic oncology. Our secondary aim was to determine if these questionnaires meet the American Medical Association (AMA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommendation that health information be written at a 6th grade or lower reading level. METHODS: The following EORTC questionnaires were obtained for analysis: The Quality of Life of Cancer Patients (QLQ-C30), Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer (QLQ-BLM30), Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (QLQ-NMIBC24), Prostate (QLQ-PR25), and Testicular Cancer (QLQ-TC26). The Automated Readability Index (ARI), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index, Linsear Write Formula (LWF), and Average Consensus Calculator (ACC) scores were used to assess the readability of each questionnaire. A higher FRE score indicates easier readability, while a lower ARI, FKGL, SMOG, LWF, and ACC score indicate easier readability. RESULTS: The QLQ-C30 had the highest FRE score, while the BLM-30 had the lowest. The QLQ-C30 had the lowest FKGL, lowest SMOG score, and lowest LWF score. Results for the other instruments are seen in Table 1. The QLQ-C30 and QLQ-TC26 had ACC scores of 6th grade, all other ACC scores were 7th grade. CONCLUSIONS: Only two of the available urologic QoL questionnaires from the EORTC appear to be written at an appropriate grade level according to AMA and NMIH standards. This suggests that the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-TC26 are suitable for and accessible to a wider range of cancer survivors, while the remaining questionnaires are one grade level above AMA and NIH recommendations. Our results may serve as a launch point for redesign of the questionnaires currently written at a higher grade level and further advocate for adoption of QoL assessment into comprehensive cancer care. Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e19 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Hannah Kay More articles by this author Tracy Rose More articles by this author Matthew Milowsky More articles by this author Angela Smith More articles by this author Marc Bjurlin More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...