Suppr超能文献

在姑息治疗临终关怀环境中,对 ICECAP-SCM 能力福利衡量标准的结构有效性和反应度进行分析。

An analysis of the construct validity and responsiveness of the ICECAP-SCM capability wellbeing measure in a palliative care hospice setting.

机构信息

Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West) at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Jul 8;21(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-01012-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

For outcome measures to be useful in health and care decision-making, they need to have certain psychometric properties. The ICECAP-Supportive Care Measure (ICECAP-SCM), a seven attribute measure (1. Choice, 2. Love and affection, 3. Physical suffering, 4. Emotional suffering, 5. Dignity, 6. Being supported, 7. Preparation) developed for use in economic evaluation of end-of-life interventions, has face validity and is feasible to use. This study aimed to assess the construct validity and responsiveness of the ICECAP-SCM in hospice inpatient and outpatient settings.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of data collated from two studies, one focusing on palliative care day services and the other on constipation management, undertaken in the same national hospice organisation across three UK hospices, was conducted. Other quality of life and wellbeing outcome measures used were the EQ-5D-5L, McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire - Expanded (MQOL-E), Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) and Palliative Outcomes Scale Symptom list (POS-S). The construct validity of the ICECAP-SCM was assessed, following hypotheses generation, by calculating correlations between: (i) its domains and the domains of other outcome measures, (ii) its summary score and the other measures' domains, (iii) its summary score and the summary scores of the other measures. The responsiveness of the ICECAP-SCM was assessed using anchor-based methods to understand change over time. Statistical analysis consisted of Spearman and Pearson correlations for construct validity and paired t-tests for the responsiveness analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight participants were included in the baseline analysis. Five strong correlations were found with ICECAP-SCM attributes and items on the other measures: four with the Emotional suffering attribute (Anxiety/depression on EQ-5D-5L, Psychological and Burden on MQOL-E and Feeling down, depressed or hopeless on PHQ-2), and one with Physical suffering (Weakness or lack of energy on POS-S). ICECAP-SCM attributes and scores were most strongly associated with the MQOL-E measure (0.73 correlation coefficient between summary scores). The responsiveness analysis (n = 36) showed the ICECAP-SCM score was responsive to change when anchored to changes on the MQOL-E over time (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides initial evidence of construct validity and responsiveness of the ICECAP-SCM in hospice settings and suggests its potential for use in end-of-life care research.

摘要

背景

为了使结果测量在健康和护理决策中有用,它们需要具有某些心理测量特性。ICECAP-支持性护理测量(ICECAP-SCM)是一种为评估生命末期干预措施的经济效果而开发的七个属性测量工具(1.选择,2.爱与感情,3.身体痛苦,4.情感痛苦,5.尊严,6.支持,7.准备),具有表面有效性,并且使用起来具有可行性。本研究旨在评估 ICECAP-SCM 在临终关怀住院和门诊环境中的结构有效性和反应性。

方法

对两项研究的数据进行二次分析,一项研究侧重于姑息治疗日间服务,另一项研究侧重于便秘管理,这些研究是在英国三家临终关怀机构的同一家全国临终关怀组织中进行的。使用的其他生活质量和幸福感测量方法包括 EQ-5D-5L、McGill 生活质量问卷扩展版(MQOL-E)、患者健康问卷-2(PHQ-2)和姑息治疗结果量表症状清单(POS-S)。在生成假设后,通过计算以下方面之间的相关性来评估 ICECAP-SCM 的结构有效性:(i)其各个领域与其他结果测量领域之间,(ii)其综合评分与其他测量领域之间,(iii)其综合评分与其他测量的综合评分之间。使用基于锚定的方法评估 ICECAP-SCM 的反应性,以了解随时间的变化。统计分析包括对结构有效性的 Spearman 和 Pearson 相关性分析,以及对反应性分析的配对 t 检验。

结果

共有 68 名参与者纳入基线分析。与 ICECAP-SCM 属性和其他测量项目之间发现了五个强相关性:四个与情感痛苦属性(EQ-5D-5L 上的焦虑/抑郁,MQOL-E 上的心理和负担,PHQ-2 上的情绪低落、沮丧或绝望)相关,一个与身体痛苦相关(POS-S 上的虚弱或缺乏能量)。ICECAP-SCM 属性和评分与 MQOL-E 测量最相关(综合评分之间的相关系数为 0.73)。反应性分析(n=36)表明,当 ICECAP-SCM 评分与 MQOL-E 随时间的变化相关联时,该评分对变化具有反应性(p<0.05)。

结论

本研究初步证明了 ICECAP-SCM 在临终关怀环境中的结构有效性和反应性,并表明其在生命末期护理研究中的潜在应用。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

10
EQ-5D and the EuroQol Group: Past, Present and Future.EQ-5D与欧洲生活质量小组:过去、现在与未来。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017 Apr;15(2):127-137. doi: 10.1007/s40258-017-0310-5.

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