Ho Francis, Lau Francis, Downing Michael G, Lesperance Mary
School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
BMC Palliat Care. 2008 Aug 4;7:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-684X-7-10.
The Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) was first introduced in1996 as a new tool for measurement of performance status in palliative care. PPS has been used in many countries and has been translated into other languages.
This study evaluated the reliability and validity of PPS. A web-based, case scenarios study with a test-retest format was used to determine reliability. Fifty-three participants were recruited and randomly divided into two groups, each evaluating 11 cases at two time points. The validity study was based on the content validation of 15 palliative care experts conducted over telephone interviews, with discussion on five themes: PPS as clinical assessment tool, the usefulness of PPS, PPS scores affecting decision making, the problems in using PPS, and the adequacy of PPS instruction.
The intraclass correlation coefficients for absolute agreement were 0.959 and 0.964 for Group 1, at Time-1 and Time-2; 0.951 and 0.931 for Group 2, at Time-1 and Time-2 respectively. Results showed that the participants were consistent in their scoring over the two times, with a mean Cohen's kappa of 0.67 for Group 1 and 0.71 for Group 2. In the validity study, all experts agreed that PPS is a valuable clinical assessment tool in palliative care. Many of them have already incorporated PPS as part of their practice standard.
The results of the reliability study demonstrated that PPS is a reliable tool. The validity study found that most experts did not feel a need to further modify PPS and, only two experts requested that some performance status measures be defined more clearly. Areas of PPS use include prognostication, disease monitoring, care planning, hospital resource allocation, clinical teaching and research. PPS is also a good communication tool between palliative care workers.
姑息治疗表现量表(PPS)于1996年首次推出,作为姑息治疗中测量表现状态的一种新工具。PPS已在许多国家使用,并已被翻译成其他语言。
本研究评估了PPS的信度和效度。采用基于网络的、重测格式的病例场景研究来确定信度。招募了53名参与者,随机分为两组,每组在两个时间点评估11个病例。效度研究基于对15名姑息治疗专家进行电话访谈的内容效度,讨论了五个主题:PPS作为临床评估工具、PPS的有用性、PPS评分对决策的影响、使用PPS的问题以及PPS指导的充分性。
第一组在时间1和时间2时,绝对一致性的组内相关系数分别为0.959和0.964;第二组在时间1和时间2时分别为0.951和0.931。结果表明,参与者在两次评分中保持一致,第一组的平均科恩kappa系数为0.67,第二组为0.71。在效度研究中,所有专家都认为PPS是姑息治疗中有价值的临床评估工具。他们中的许多人已经将PPS纳入其实践标准的一部分。
信度研究结果表明PPS是一种可靠的工具。效度研究发现,大多数专家认为没有必要进一步修改PPS,只有两位专家要求更明确地定义一些表现状态指标。PPS的使用领域包括预后评估、疾病监测、护理计划、医院资源分配、临床教学和研究。PPS也是姑息治疗工作者之间良好的沟通工具。