Suppr超能文献

评估姑息治疗环境中的生活质量:四种患者报告结局测量工具(EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL、FACT-Pal、FACT-Pal-14、FACT-G7)的直接比较。

Assessing quality of life in palliative care settings: head-to-head comparison of four patient-reported outcome measures (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, FACT-Pal, FACT-Pal-14, FACT-G7).

机构信息

School of Psychology, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

IMPACCT (Improving Palliative, Aged and Chronic Care through Clinical Research and Translation, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

出版信息

Support Care Cancer. 2020 Jan;28(1):141-153. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04754-9. Epub 2019 Apr 16.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Head-to-head comparison of reliability, validity and responsiveness of four patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) suitable for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in palliative care settings: EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, FACT-G7, FACIT-Pal and short-form FACIT-Pal-14.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of two phase III randomised trials: ketamine for chronic cancer pain, octreotide for vomiting in inoperable malignant bowel obstruction. Sub-groups were defined by Australia-modified Karnofsky performance status (AKPS) and participants' global impression of change (GIC). Two aspects of reliability were assessed: internal consistency (Cronbach alpha, α); test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)) of patients with stable AKPS and those who self-reported 'no change' on GIC. Construct validity was assessed via pre-determined hypotheses about sensitivity of PROM scores to AKPS groups and responsiveness of PROM change scores to GIC groups using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

FACIT-Pal had better internal consistency (α ranged 0.59-0.80, 15/18 ≥ 0.70) than QLQ-C15-PAL (0.51-0.85, 4/8 ≥ 0.70) and FACT-G7 (0.54-0.64, 0/2 ≥ 0.70). FACIT scales had better test-retest reliability (FACIT-Pal 11/27 ICCs ≥ 0.70, FACT-G7 2/3 ICCs ≥ 0.70) than QLQ-C15-PAL (2/30 ICCs ≥ 0.70, 18/30 ≤ 0.5). Four scales demonstrated sensitivity to AKPS: QLQ-PAL-15 Physical Functioning and Global QOL, FACT-G Functional Wellbeing and FACIT-Pal Trial Outcome Index (TOI). Nine scales demonstrated responsiveness: three in the ketamine trial population (QLQ-C15-PAL Pain, FACIT-Pal-14, FACT-G7), six in the octreotide trial population (QLQ-C15-PAL Fatigue; FACIT-Pal PalCare, TOI, Total; FACT-G Physical Wellbeing and Total).

CONCLUSIONS

No PROM was clearly superior, confirming that choosing the best PROM requires careful consideration of the research goals, patient population and the domains of HRQOL targeted by the intervention being investigated.

摘要

目的

对头对头比较四种适合评估姑息治疗环境下健康相关生活质量(HRQOL)的患者报告结局测量(PROMS)的可靠性、有效性和反应性:EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL、FACT-G7、FACIT-Pal 和简短版 FACIT-Pal-14。

方法

对两项 III 期随机试验的二次分析:氯胺酮治疗慢性癌痛,奥曲肽治疗不可切除的恶性肠梗阻呕吐。亚组由澳大利亚改良 Karnofsky 表现状态(AKPS)和参与者整体印象变化(GIC)定义。评估了可靠性的两个方面:内部一致性(Cronbach alpha,α);稳定 AKPS 患者和 GIC 报告“无变化”患者的测试 - 重测可靠性(组内相关系数(ICC))。通过预先确定的假设评估结构有效性,即 PROMS 评分对 AKPS 组的敏感性和 PROMS 变化评分对 GIC 组的反应性,使用方差分析。

结果

FACIT-Pal 的内部一致性更好(α范围为 0.59-0.80,15/18≥0.70),而 QLQ-C15-PAL(0.51-0.85,4/8≥0.70)和 FACT-G7(0.54-0.64,0/2≥0.70)。FACIT 量表的测试 - 重测可靠性更好(FACIT-Pal 11/27 ICCs≥0.70,FACT-G7 2/3 ICCs≥0.70),而 QLQ-C15-PAL(2/30 ICCs≥0.70,18/30≤0.5)。四个量表对 AKPS 具有敏感性:QLQ-PAL-15 身体功能和全球生活质量,FACT-G 功能健康和 FACIT-Pal 试验结局指数(TOI)。九个量表具有反应性:氯胺酮试验人群中的三个(QLQ-C15-PAL 疼痛,FACIT-Pal-14,FACT-G7),奥曲肽试验人群中的六个(QLQ-C15-PAL 疲劳; FACIT-Pal PalCare,TOI,总; FACT-G 身体幸福感和总)。

结论

没有一个 PROM 明显更优,这证实了选择最佳 PROM 需要仔细考虑研究目标、患者人群以及正在研究的干预措施所针对的 HRQOL 领域。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验