1 Wolfson Palliative Care Research Centre, Hull York Medical School, University of Hull, Hull, UK.
2 Cicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, King's College London, London, UK.
Palliat Med. 2019 Sep;33(8):1045-1057. doi: 10.1177/0269216319854264. Epub 2019 Jun 12.
Few measures capture the complex symptoms and concerns of those receiving palliative care.
To validate the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale, a measure underpinned by extensive psychometric development, by evaluating its validity, reliability and responsiveness to change.
Concurrent, cross-cultural validation study of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale - both (1) patient self-report and (2) staff proxy-report versions. We tested construct validity (factor analysis, known-group comparisons, and correlational analysis), reliability (internal consistency, agreement, and test-retest reliability), and responsiveness (through longitudinal evaluation of change).
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: In all, 376 adults receiving palliative care, and 161 clinicians, from a range of settings in the United Kingdom and Germany.
We confirm a three-factor structure (Physical Symptoms, Emotional Symptoms and Communication/Practical Issues). Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale shows strong ability to distinguish between clinically relevant groups; total Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale and Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale subscale scores were higher - reflecting more problems - in those patients with 'unstable' or 'deteriorating' versus 'stable' Phase of Illness (F = 15.1, p < 0.001). Good convergent and discriminant validity to hypothesised items and subscales of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General is demonstrated. The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale shows good internal consistency (α = 0.77) and acceptable to good test-retest reliability (60% of items k > 0.60). Longitudinal validity in form of responsiveness to change is good.
The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale is a valid and reliable outcome measure, both in patient self-report and staff proxy-report versions. It can assess and monitor symptoms and concerns in advanced illness, determine the impact of healthcare interventions, and demonstrate quality of care. This represents a major step forward internationally for palliative care outcome measurement.
很少有措施能够捕捉到接受姑息治疗的患者的复杂症状和关注点。
通过评估其有效性、可靠性和对变化的反应性,验证基于广泛心理测量学发展的综合姑息治疗结局量表。
对综合姑息治疗结局量表进行了同时、跨文化的验证研究——(1)患者自我报告和(2)工作人员代理报告版本。我们测试了结构有效性(因素分析、已知组比较和相关分析)、可靠性(内部一致性、一致性和测试-重测信度)和反应性(通过对变化的纵向评估)。
地点/参与者:共有 376 名在英国和德国不同环境中接受姑息治疗的成年人和 161 名临床医生参与了研究。
我们确认了一个三因素结构(身体症状、情绪症状和沟通/实际问题)。综合姑息治疗结局量表在区分临床相关组方面具有很强的能力;总体综合姑息治疗结局量表和综合姑息治疗结局量表子量表评分在“不稳定”或“恶化”阶段的患者中更高——反映了更多的问题——而在“稳定”疾病阶段的患者中则较低(F=15.1,p<0.001)。与埃德蒙顿症状评估系统和癌症治疗功能评估-一般的假设项目和子量表具有良好的收敛和判别有效性。综合姑息治疗结局量表具有良好的内部一致性(α=0.77)和可接受至良好的测试-重测信度(60%的项目 k>0.60)。以对变化的反应性为形式的纵向有效性良好。
综合姑息治疗结局量表在患者自我报告和工作人员代理报告版本中都是一种有效且可靠的结局测量工具。它可以评估和监测晚期疾病中的症状和关注点,确定医疗干预的影响,并展示护理质量。这代表了姑息治疗结局测量在国际上的重要进展。