Sakurai Hiroki, Miyashita Mitsunori, Morita Tatsuya, Naito Akemi Shirado, Miyamoto Shingo, Otani Hiroyuki, Nozato Junko, Yokomichi Naosuke, Imai Kengo, Oishi Ai, Kizawa Yoshiyuki, Matsushima Eisuke
Department of Palliative Medicine, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Palliative Nursing and Health Sciences, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Palliat Support Care. 2021 Dec;19(6):702-708. doi: 10.1017/S1478951521000018.
The goal of palliative and supportive care is to improve patients' quality of life (QoL). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the gold standard for the assessment of QoL and symptoms; however, when self-reporting is complicated, PROMs are often substituted with proxy-reported outcome measures, such as clinician-reported outcome measures. The objective of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) for staff (IPOS-Staff).
This multicenter, cross-sectional observational study was conducted concurrently with the validation of the IPOS for patients (IPOS-Patient). Japanese adult patients with cancer and their staff were recruited. We assessed the characteristics of the patients and staff members, missing values, prevalence, and total IPOS scores. For the analysis of criterion validity, intra-rater, and inter-rater reliability, we calculated intraclass correlations (ICCs).
One hundred and forty-three patients completed the IPOS-Patient, and 79 medical staff members completed the IPOS-Staff. The most common missing values from IPOS-Staff were Family Anxiety (3.5%) and Sharing Feelings (3.5%). Over half of the patients scored themselves moderate or worse for Poor Mobility, Anxiety, and Family Anxiety, while staff members scored patients moderate or worse for Weakness, Anxiety, and Family Anxiety. For criterion validity (patient-staff agreement) as well as intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, ICCs ranged from 0.114 (Sharing Feelings) to 0.826 (Nausea), 0.720 (Anxiety) to 0.933 (Nausea), and -0.038 (Practical Problems) to 0.830 (Nausea), respectively.
The IPOS-Staff is easy to respond to; it has fair validity and reliability for physical items but poor for psycho-social items. By defining the context and objectives of its use and interpretation, the IPOS-Staff can be a useful tool for measuring outcomes in adult patients with cancer who cannot complete self-evaluations.
姑息治疗和支持性护理的目标是提高患者的生活质量(QoL)。患者报告结局指标(PROMs)是评估生活质量和症状的金标准;然而,当自我报告复杂时,PROMs通常会被代理报告结局指标所替代,如临床医生报告结局指标。本研究的目的是评估日本版员工综合姑息治疗结局量表(IPOS-Staff)的有效性和可靠性。
本多中心横断面观察性研究与患者版IPOS(IPOS-Patient)的验证同时进行。招募了日本成年癌症患者及其医护人员。我们评估了患者和医护人员的特征、缺失值、患病率以及IPOS总分。为了分析效标效度、评分者内信度和评分者间信度,我们计算了组内相关系数(ICC)。
143名患者完成了IPOS-Patient,79名医护人员完成了IPOS-Staff。IPOS-Staff中最常见的缺失值是家庭焦虑(3.5%)和情感分享(3.5%)。超过一半的患者在行动不便、焦虑和家庭焦虑方面给自己的评分是中度或更差,而医护人员对患者在虚弱、焦虑和家庭焦虑方面的评分是中度或更差。对于效标效度(患者-医护人员一致性)以及评分者内信度和评分者间信度,ICC分别在0.114(情感分享)至0.826(恶心)、0.720(焦虑)至0.933(恶心)以及 -0.038(实际问题)至0.830(恶心)之间。
IPOS-Staff易于作答;它在身体项目方面具有一定的有效性和可靠性,但在心理社会项目方面较差。通过明确其使用和解释的背景及目标,IPOS-Staff可以成为测量无法完成自我评估的成年癌症患者结局的有用工具。