Chow Ronald, Lao Nicholas, Popovic Marko, Chow Edward, Cella David, Beaumont Jennifer, Lam Henry, Pulenzas Natalie, Bedard Gillian, Wong Erin, DeAngelis Carlo, Bottomley Andrew
Support Care Cancer. 2014 Sep;22(9):2593-8. doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2352-7.
This review compares and contrasts the development, validity, and characteristics of two quality of life (QOL) assessment tools used in patients with primary brain cancers: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Brain Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-BN20) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br).
A literature search was conducted using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (June 2013), Ovid EMBASE (1947 to 2013, week 27), and Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 2013, week 1) to identify studies that discussed the development, characteristics, validity, and reliability of the EORTC QLQ-BN20 or the FACT-Br.
The EORTC QLQ-BN20 consists of 20 items that assess future uncertainty, visual disorder, motor dysfunction, and communication deficit. Items are presented as questions on a scale ranging from 1 = “not at all” to 4 = “very much.” Reliability and validity testing of the QLQ-BN20 revealed a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient that ranged from 0.71 to 0.90. The FACT-Br consists of 23 items that assess general well-being and brain cancer-specific concerns that include concentration, memory, seizures, eyesight, hearing, speech, personality, expression of thoughts, weakness, coordination, and headaches. These items are presented as statements on a scale ranging from 0 = “not applicable” to 4 = “extremely relevant.” The FACT-Br underwent validity as well as test-retest reliability testing with 101 and 46 patients, respectively. Validity testing found low to moderate correlation with the FACT-G questionnaire, while reliability testing for the brain subscale revealed an acceptable correlation coefficient (r = 0.66; p < 0.001).
The QLQ-BN20 and the FACT-Br are both valid and reliable tools that have been used extensively in the primary brain cancer population. Choice between the two tools should consider each instrument’s individual strengths and weaknesses.
本综述比较并对比了两种用于原发性脑癌患者的生活质量（QOL）评估工具的发展、效度及特征，这两种工具分别是欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷脑癌模块（EORTC QLQ - BN20）和癌症治疗功能评估量表 - 脑（FACT - Br）。
利用Cochrane对照试验中心注册库（2013年6月）、Ovid EMBASE（1947年至2013年，第27周）以及Ovid MEDLINE（1946年至2013年7月，第1周）进行文献检索，以确定讨论EORTC QLQ - BN20或FACT - Br的发展、特征、效度及信度的研究。
EORTC QLQ - BN20由20个条目组成，用于评估未来不确定性、视觉障碍、运动功能障碍及沟通缺陷。条目以问题形式呈现，评分范围从1 =“根本没有”到4 =“非常严重”。QLQ - BN20的信度和效度测试显示，其Cronbach's alpha系数范围为0.71至0.90。FACT - Br由23个条目组成，用于评估总体健康状况以及脑癌相关的特定问题，包括注意力、记忆力、癫痫发作、视力、听力、言语、性格、思维表达、虚弱、协调性和头痛。这些条目以陈述形式呈现，评分范围从0 =“不适用”到4 =“极其相关”。FACT - Br分别对101例和46例患者进行了效度及重测信度测试。效度测试发现与FACT - G问卷的相关性较低至中等，而脑癌分量表的信度测试显示相关系数可接受（r = 0.66；p < 0.001）。
QLQ - BN20和FACT - Br都是有效且可靠的工具，已在原发性脑癌人群中广泛使用。在这两种工具之间进行选择时，应考虑每种工具的优缺点。
