Loading...
The feasibility of patient reported outcome measures for the care of penile cancer
Walters, Elizabeth R. Hollyhead, Cyan Njoku, K. Vyas, L. Modica, C. Kayes, O. Eardley, I. Henry, A.
Walters, Elizabeth R.
Hollyhead, Cyan
Njoku, K.
Vyas, L.
Modica, C.
Kayes, O.
Eardley, I.
Henry, A.
Publication Date
2022-07
End of Embargo
Supervisor
Rights
© 2022 Wiley. This is the peer-reviewed version of the following article: Branney P, Walters ER, Bryant EJ et al (2022) The feasibility of patient reported outcome measures for the care of penile cancer. International Journal of Urological Nursing. xx(xx): xx-xxx, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/ijun.12307. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.
Peer-Reviewed
Yes
Open Access status
openAccess
Accepted for publication
2021-11-26
Institution
Department
Awarded
Embargo end date
Collections
Additional title
Abstract
When used in routine clinical practice, Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMS) can give patients tacit approval to discuss embarrassing topics, which could be particularly useful for urological nursing. The aim of this study was to assess whether it would be feasible to use two such measures for penile cancer; one for body image (the Male Genital Self-Image Scale; MGSIS-5) and another for lymphedema (the Groin and Lower Limb Lymphedema questionnaire; G3L-20). Study packs were posted to penile cancer patients who had received (i) sentinel node biopsy only, (ii) inguinal node dissection only, and (iii) inguinal node dissection with post-operative radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. The two measures (MGSIS-5 and G3L-20) were complemented with those specific to sexual function (IIEF) and cancer (EORTC-QLQ-C30 version 3) and a modified Lymphoedema Genitourinary Cancer Questionnaire (mLGUCQ). Twenty patients returned questionnaires. Validity and reliability analyses are presented but low participant numbers mean that results need treating with caution. Results show sufficient feasibility for the MGSIS-5 and the G3L-20 to warrant another study to attract larger numbers of participants, either over a longer time frame or at multiple sites. In these further studies, we would recommend adding (1) more Likert responses, (2) the timeframe to the MGIS and (3) exploring either the use of sexual desire psychometric measures or the addition of sexual desire items to the MGSIS for this patient group.
Version
Accepted manuscript
Citation
Branney P, Walters ER, Bryant EJ et al (2022) The feasibility of patient reported outcome measures for the care of penile cancer. International Journal of Urological Nursing. 16(2): 138-146.
Link to publisher’s version
Link to published version
Link to Version of Record
Type
Article