Designing and Validating a Comprehensive Patient-Reported Outcomes Measure for Ambulatory Cancer Settings: The Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System for Cancer.

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY JCO oncology practice Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI:10.1200/OP.24.00088
Linda Watson, Claire Link, Siwei Qi, Andrea DeIure, Lindsi Chmielewski, April Hildebrand, Lisa Barbera
{"title":"Designing and Validating a Comprehensive Patient-Reported Outcomes Measure for Ambulatory Cancer Settings: The Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System for Cancer.","authors":"Linda Watson, Claire Link, Siwei Qi, Andrea DeIure, Lindsi Chmielewski, April Hildebrand, Lisa Barbera","doi":"10.1200/OP.24.00088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) information has been routinely collected in Cancer Care Alberta (CCA) for years using the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) and Canadian Problem Checklist (CPC). There was interest in combining these into a more comprehensive single measure tailored to ambulatory cancer settings. The purpose of this study was to validate an expanded and redesigned ESAS-r called the ESAS-r Cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Stakeholder engagement, a review of the literature, and 2 years of CPC data collected in the cancer program informed the addition of six symptoms to the ESAS-r. To assess and validate the measure, 1,600 randomly sampled patients were mailed paper copies of the ESAS-r Cancer, ESAS-r, and a validated, comprehensive PRO measure called the Memorial System Assessment Scale-Short Form (MSAS-SF), which is often used with patients with cancer. Canonical Correlation Analysis and exploratory factor analyses were performed to assess concurrent and construct validity of the ESAS-r Cancer against ESAS-r, using MSAS-SF as the reference measure for comparison. Cronbach α was calculated to assess reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four hundred and sixty-one patients (29% response rate) completed all three questionnaires. ESAS-r Cancer showed higher numerical correlation than ESAS-r and accounted for more information included on MSAS-SF, explaining slightly more variance than ESAS-r (75.2% <i>v</i> 73.5%). The three-dimensional factor structure of ESAS-r Cancer outperformed the two-dimensional factor structure of ESAS-r. The reliability of ESAS-r Cancer was verified and found to be slightly higher than ESAS-r (Cronbach α = .903 <i>v</i> .884).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESAS-r Cancer is now in use with patients throughout CCA. This valid and reliable PRO measure can be used by other cancer or specialized health care programs who wish to routinely assess common symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.24.00088","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) information has been routinely collected in Cancer Care Alberta (CCA) for years using the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) and Canadian Problem Checklist (CPC). There was interest in combining these into a more comprehensive single measure tailored to ambulatory cancer settings. The purpose of this study was to validate an expanded and redesigned ESAS-r called the ESAS-r Cancer.

Methods: Stakeholder engagement, a review of the literature, and 2 years of CPC data collected in the cancer program informed the addition of six symptoms to the ESAS-r. To assess and validate the measure, 1,600 randomly sampled patients were mailed paper copies of the ESAS-r Cancer, ESAS-r, and a validated, comprehensive PRO measure called the Memorial System Assessment Scale-Short Form (MSAS-SF), which is often used with patients with cancer. Canonical Correlation Analysis and exploratory factor analyses were performed to assess concurrent and construct validity of the ESAS-r Cancer against ESAS-r, using MSAS-SF as the reference measure for comparison. Cronbach α was calculated to assess reliability.

Results: Four hundred and sixty-one patients (29% response rate) completed all three questionnaires. ESAS-r Cancer showed higher numerical correlation than ESAS-r and accounted for more information included on MSAS-SF, explaining slightly more variance than ESAS-r (75.2% v 73.5%). The three-dimensional factor structure of ESAS-r Cancer outperformed the two-dimensional factor structure of ESAS-r. The reliability of ESAS-r Cancer was verified and found to be slightly higher than ESAS-r (Cronbach α = .903 v .884).

Conclusion: ESAS-r Cancer is now in use with patients throughout CCA. This valid and reliable PRO measure can be used by other cancer or specialized health care programs who wish to routinely assess common symptoms.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
设计并验证用于非住院癌症治疗的综合患者报告结果测量方法:修订版埃德蒙顿癌症症状评估系统》(The Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System for Cancer)。
目的:多年来,阿尔伯塔癌症护理中心(CCA)一直使用修订版埃德蒙顿症状评估系统(ESAS-r)和加拿大问题清单(CPC)收集患者报告结果(PROs)信息。人们有兴趣将这两种方法结合起来,为非卧床癌症患者量身定制一种更全面的单一测量方法。本研究旨在验证经过扩展和重新设计的 ESAS-r,即 ESAS-r Cancer:方法:通过利益相关者的参与、文献综述以及在癌症项目中收集的两年 CPC 数据,在 ESAS-r 中增加了六个症状。为了评估和验证该测量方法,我们向 1600 名随机抽样的患者邮寄了 ESAS-r 癌症、ESAS-r 和一种名为 Memorial System Assessment Scale-Short Form(MSAS-SF)的经过验证的综合 PRO 测量方法的纸质副本,该方法常用于癌症患者。为了评估ESAS-r癌症版与ESAS-r版的并发效度和结构效度,我们使用MSAS-SF作为参照量表进行比较,并进行了典型相关分析和探索性因子分析。计算Cronbach α以评估信度:461名患者(回复率为29%)完成了所有三份问卷。癌症ESAS-r的数值相关性比ESAS-r高,并且包含了MSAS-SF中更多的信息,比ESAS-r(75.2%对73.5%)能解释更多的方差。癌症 ESAS-r 的三维因子结构优于 ESAS-r 的二维因子结构。ESAS-r《癌症》的信度经验证略高于ESAS-r(Cronbach α = .903 v .884):结论:ESAS-r Cancer 现已用于整个 CCA 的患者。结论:ESAS-r Cancer 目前已在整个 CCA 的患者中使用,这种有效可靠的 PRO 测量方法可用于其他希望对常见症状进行常规评估的癌症或专业医疗保健项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
期刊最新文献
Patient, Parent, and Oncologist Perspectives and Recommendations on the Right Way to Talk About Prognosis in Advanced Childhood Cancer. Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline Clinical Insights. "Rehabbed to Death" in Oncology: Where Do We Go From Here? Impact of an Etoposide Chemotherapy Shortage on Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of a Natural Experiment. Association of Community-Level Social Vulnerability With Clinical Trial Discussion and Participation Among Cancer Survivors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1