Investigators propose an observational interview study to explore how patients understand treatment conversations with their physicians within the framework of health literacy. The study team will test whether patients' understanding of treatment options and side effects can be improved when patients receive a low literacy educational supplement after meeting with their urologist. Investigators will interview a group of newly diagnosed, early stage, African American prostate cancer patients.
Investigators hypothesize that the delivery of a scripted, tailored, low literacy educational supplement will result in a statistically significant decrease in decisional conflict, and a statistically significant improvement in comprehension of cancer treatment and its side effects compared to standard practice.
The study team will measure patients' comprehension of treatment options and side effects, as well as decisional conflict; after standard practice, and again after exposure to the educational supplement. Investigators will compare the urologists' assessment of patients' 1) health literacy 2) preferences for side effects 3) stage of decision making, 4) treatment choice or predisposition toward treatment choice. 5) preference for role in decision making (active, passive, or shared with physician); to measures obtained from patients. These comparisons will allow investigators to quantify the potential benefit to the physician of information obtained through the interview and low literacy educational supplement.
