Development and validation of questionnaires for eating-related distress among advanced cancer patients and families.
Development and validation of questionnaires for eating-related distress among advanced cancer patients and families.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jcsm.13133
复制
发表时间：
2023-02
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
进食相关困扰（ERD）是晚期癌症患者和家庭照顾者中的一种心理社会困扰。缓解是姑息治疗的一个关键问题，但是，没有有效的工具来衡量ERD。本研究的目的是验证评估ERD患者和家庭照顾者的工具。本研究包括开发和验证/复检阶段。在开发阶段，我们对患者和家庭照顾者进行了初步的问卷调查。经过表面效度和内容效度检验后，我们进行了探索性因素分析，并讨论了最终采用的项目。在验证/重测阶段，我们用探索性因素分析检验了因素效度。我们计算了患者问卷与患者年龄之间的皮尔逊相关系数，厌食/恶病质治疗的功能评估厌食/恶病质子量表（FAACT ACS）和欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织生活质量问卷-恶病质24（EORTC QLQ-CAX 24）和家庭照顾者问卷与照顾者生活质量指数-癌症（CQOLC）之间的Pearson相关系数同时有效。我们计算了Cronbach α系数（Cronbach α）和组内相关系数（ICC）的内部一致性和重测信度。我们根据已知组有效性的国际共识标准，在问卷和癌症恶病质之间进行了Mann-Whitney U检验。在发展阶段，162对患者和家庭照顾者被要求参与，144名患者和106名家庭照顾者做出了回应。在验证/重新测试阶段，333对患者和家庭照顾者被要求参与，234名患者和152名家庭照顾者做出了回应。总体而言，183名患者和112名家庭护理人员进行了重新测试。七个概念组提取的ERD患者和家庭照顾者，分别。患者因素1-7与FAACT ACS（分别为r =-0.63、-0.43、-0.55、-0.40、-0.38、-0.54、-0.38）和EORTC QLQ-CAX 24（分别为r = 0.58、0.40、0.60、0.49、0.38、0.59、0.42）相关。家庭因素1-7与CQOLC相关（r分别为-0.34、-0.30、-0.37、-0.37、-0.46、-0.42、-0.40）。患者各因子和全因子的Cronbach α和ICC值分别为0.84 ~ 0.96和0.67 ~ 0.83。家庭照顾者各因子和全因子的变异系数分别为0.84 ~ 0.96和0.63 ~ 0.84。恶病质组患者的每个因子和所有因子的评分均显著高于非恶病质组。新开发的工具来衡量ERD经历了先进的癌症患者和家庭照顾者已经得到验证。
Eating‐related distress (ERD) is one type of psychosocial distress among advanced cancer patients and family caregivers. Its alleviation is a key issue in palliative care; however, there is no validated tool for measuring ERD. The purpose of this study was to validate tools for evaluating ERD among patients and family caregivers. The study consisted of a development and validation/retest phase. In the development phase, we made preliminary questionnaires for patients and family caregivers. After face validity and content validity, we performed an exploratory factor analysis and discussed the final adoption of items. In the validation/retest phase, we examined factor validity with an exploratory factor analysis. We calculated Pearson's correlation coefficients between the questionnaire for patients, the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia Cachexia Subscale (FAACT ACS) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire‐Cachexia 24 (EORTC QLQ‐CAX24) and Pearson's correlation coefficients between the questionnaire for family caregivers and the Caregiver Quality of Life Index‐Cancer (CQOLC) for concurrent validity. We calculated Cronbach's alpha coefficients (Cronbach's alpha) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for internal consistency and test–retest reliability. We performed the Mann–Whitney U test between the questionnaires and cancer cachexia based on criteria from the international consensus for known‐group validity. In the development phase, 162 pairs of patients and family caregivers were asked to participate, and 144 patients and 106 family caregivers responded. In the validation/retest phase, 333 pairs of patients and family caregivers were asked to participate, and 234 patients and 152 family caregivers responded. Overall, 183 patients and 112 family caregivers did the retest. Seven conceptual groups were extracted for the ERD among patients and family caregivers, respectively. Patient factors 1–7 correlated with FAACT ACS (r = −0.63, −0.43, −0.55, −0.40, −0.38, −0.54, −0.38, respectively) and EORTC QLQ‐CAX24 (r = 0.58, 0.40, 0.60, 0.49, 0.38, 0.59, 0.42, respectively). Family factors 1–7 correlated with CQOLC (r = −0.34, −0.30, −0.37, −0.37, −0.46, −0.42, −0.40, respectively). The values of Cronbach's alpha and ICC of each factor and all factors of patients ranged from 0.84 to 0.96 and 0.67 to 0.83, respectively. Those of each factor and all factors of family caregivers ranged from 0.84 to 0.96 and 0.63 to 0.84, respectively. The cachexia group of patients had significantly higher scores than the non‐cachexia group for each factor and all factors. Newly developed tools for measuring ERD experienced by advanced cancer patients and family caregivers have been validated.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
45.3
作者：
Roeland, Eric J.;Bohlke, Kari;Loprinzi, Charles L.
通讯作者：
Loprinzi, Charles L.
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
LeBlanc, Thomas W.;Samsa, Greg P.;Abernethy, Amy P.
通讯作者：
Abernethy, Amy P.
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
Amano, Koji;Morita, Tatsuya;Tatara, Ryohei
通讯作者：
Tatara, Ryohei
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Amano, Koji;Maeda, Isseki;Takagi, Ibuki
通讯作者：
Takagi, Ibuki
影响因子：
7.3
作者：
Arends J;Strasser F;Gonella S;Solheim TS;Madeddu C;Ravasco P;Buonaccorso L;de van der Schueren MAE;Baldwin C;Chasen M;Ripamonti CI;ESMO Guidelines Committee. Electronic address: clinicalguidelines@esmo.org
通讯作者：
ESMO Guidelines Committee. Electronic address: clinicalguidelines@esmo.org