关于 EORTC 沟通问卷 EORTC QLQ-COMU26 可靠性和有效性的国际实地研究。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health and Quality of Life Outcomes Pub Date : 2024-10-10 DOI:10.1186/s12955-024-02298-z
Juan Ignacio Arraras, Johannes Giesinger, Omar Shamieh, Iqbal Bahar, Michael Koller, Anne Bredart, Anna Costantini, Eva Greimel, Monika Sztankay, Lisa M Wintner, Marina Carreiro de Sousa, Hiroto Ishiki, Meropi Kontogianni, Maja Wolan, Yuichiro Kikawa, Anne Lanceley, Ioannis Gioulbasanis, Amelie Harle, Uxue Zarandona, Dagmara Kulis, Karin Kuljanic
{"title":"关于 EORTC 沟通问卷 EORTC QLQ-COMU26 可靠性和有效性的国际实地研究。","authors":"Juan Ignacio Arraras, Johannes Giesinger, Omar Shamieh, Iqbal Bahar, Michael Koller, Anne Bredart, Anna Costantini, Eva Greimel, Monika Sztankay, Lisa M Wintner, Marina Carreiro de Sousa, Hiroto Ishiki, Meropi Kontogianni, Maja Wolan, Yuichiro Kikawa, Anne Lanceley, Ioannis Gioulbasanis, Amelie Harle, Uxue Zarandona, Dagmara Kulis, Karin Kuljanic","doi":"10.1186/s12955-024-02298-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The EORTC Quality of Life Group has developed a questionnaire to evaluate cancer patients' perception of their communication with healthcare professionals (HCPs): the EORTC QLQ-COMU26. In this study we test the validity and reliability of this novel measure in an international and culturally diverse sample of cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cancer patients completed the following EORTC questionnaires at two time points (before and during treatment): the QLQ-COMU26 (including a debriefing questionnaire), the QLQ-C30, and specific IN-PATSAT32 scales. These data were used to assess: the cross-cultural applicability, acceptability, scale structure, reliability, convergent/divergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change of the QLQ-COMU26.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were collected from 498 patients with various cancer diagnoses in 10 European countries, Japan, Jordan and India (overall 5 cultural regions). At most, only 3% of patients identified an item as confusing and 0.6% as upsetting, which indicates that the questionnaire was clear and did not trigger negative emotional responses. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-trait scaling confirmed the hypothesised QLQ-COMU26 scale structure comprising six multi-item scales and four single items (RMSEA = 0.025). Reliability was good for all scales (internal consistency > 0.70; test-retest reliability > 0.85). Convergent validity was supported by correlations of ≥ 0.50 with related scales of the IN-PATSAT32 and correlations < 0.30 with unrelated QLQ-C30 scales. Known-groups validity was shown according to sex, education, levels of anxiety and depression, satisfaction with communication, disease stage and treatment intention, professional evaluated, and having a companion during the visit. The QLQ-COMU26 captured changes over time in groups that were defined based on changes in the item of satisfaction with communication.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 is a reliable and valid measure of patients' perceptions of their communication with HCPs. The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 can be used in daily clinical practice and research and in various cancer patient groups from different cultures. This questionnaire can help to improve communication between patients and healthcare professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":"22 1","pages":"87"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11465687/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An international field study for the reliability and validity of the EORTC communication questionnaire EORTC QLQ-COMU26.\",\"authors\":\"Juan Ignacio Arraras, Johannes Giesinger, Omar Shamieh, Iqbal Bahar, Michael Koller, Anne Bredart, Anna Costantini, Eva Greimel, Monika Sztankay, Lisa M Wintner, Marina Carreiro de Sousa, Hiroto Ishiki, Meropi Kontogianni, Maja Wolan, Yuichiro Kikawa, Anne Lanceley, Ioannis Gioulbasanis, Amelie Harle, Uxue Zarandona, Dagmara Kulis, Karin Kuljanic\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12955-024-02298-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The EORTC Quality of Life Group has developed a questionnaire to evaluate cancer patients' perception of their communication with healthcare professionals (HCPs): the EORTC QLQ-COMU26. In this study we test the validity and reliability of this novel measure in an international and culturally diverse sample of cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cancer patients completed the following EORTC questionnaires at two time points (before and during treatment): the QLQ-COMU26 (including a debriefing questionnaire), the QLQ-C30, and specific IN-PATSAT32 scales. These data were used to assess: the cross-cultural applicability, acceptability, scale structure, reliability, convergent/divergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change of the QLQ-COMU26.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were collected from 498 patients with various cancer diagnoses in 10 European countries, Japan, Jordan and India (overall 5 cultural regions). At most, only 3% of patients identified an item as confusing and 0.6% as upsetting, which indicates that the questionnaire was clear and did not trigger negative emotional responses. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-trait scaling confirmed the hypothesised QLQ-COMU26 scale structure comprising six multi-item scales and four single items (RMSEA = 0.025). Reliability was good for all scales (internal consistency > 0.70; test-retest reliability > 0.85). Convergent validity was supported by correlations of ≥ 0.50 with related scales of the IN-PATSAT32 and correlations < 0.30 with unrelated QLQ-C30 scales. Known-groups validity was shown according to sex, education, levels of anxiety and depression, satisfaction with communication, disease stage and treatment intention, professional evaluated, and having a companion during the visit. The QLQ-COMU26 captured changes over time in groups that were defined based on changes in the item of satisfaction with communication.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 is a reliable and valid measure of patients' perceptions of their communication with HCPs. The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 can be used in daily clinical practice and research and in various cancer patient groups from different cultures. This questionnaire can help to improve communication between patients and healthcare professionals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12980,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"87\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11465687/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02298-z\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02298-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:欧洲癌症研究中心(EORTC)生活质量小组编制了一份调查问卷:EORTC QLQ-COMU26,用于评估癌症患者对与医护人员(HCPs)沟通的看法。在本研究中,我们在国际性和文化多样性的癌症患者样本中测试了这一新型测量方法的有效性和可靠性:癌症患者在两个时间点(治疗前和治疗期间)完成了以下 EORTC 问卷:QLQ-COMU26(包括汇报问卷)、QLQ-C30 和 IN-PATSAT32 特定量表。这些数据用于评估:QLQ-COMU26 的跨文化适用性、可接受性、量表结构、可靠性、收敛/发散效度、已知群体效度和对变化的反应性:结果:我们收集了来自 10 个欧洲国家、日本、约旦和印度(共 5 个文化区域)的 498 名不同癌症诊断患者的数据。最多只有 3% 的患者认为某个项目令人困惑,0.6% 的患者认为令人不安,这表明问卷内容清晰,不会引发负面情绪反应。确认性因子分析和多性状标度证实了假设的 QLQ-COMU26 量表结构,其中包括六个多项目量表和四个单项目量表(RMSEA = 0.025)。所有量表的信度均良好(内部一致性 > 0.70;测试-再测信度 > 0.85)。与 IN-PATSAT32 相关量表的相关性≥ 0.50,以及相关性结论支持了其收敛效度:EORTC QLQ-COMU26 是衡量患者与 HCP 沟通感受的可靠有效的方法。EORTC QLQ-COMU26 可用于日常临床实践和研究,也可用于来自不同文化背景的各种癌症患者群体。该问卷有助于改善患者与医护人员之间的沟通。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
An international field study for the reliability and validity of the EORTC communication questionnaire EORTC QLQ-COMU26.

Background: The EORTC Quality of Life Group has developed a questionnaire to evaluate cancer patients' perception of their communication with healthcare professionals (HCPs): the EORTC QLQ-COMU26. In this study we test the validity and reliability of this novel measure in an international and culturally diverse sample of cancer patients.

Methods: Cancer patients completed the following EORTC questionnaires at two time points (before and during treatment): the QLQ-COMU26 (including a debriefing questionnaire), the QLQ-C30, and specific IN-PATSAT32 scales. These data were used to assess: the cross-cultural applicability, acceptability, scale structure, reliability, convergent/divergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change of the QLQ-COMU26.

Results: Data were collected from 498 patients with various cancer diagnoses in 10 European countries, Japan, Jordan and India (overall 5 cultural regions). At most, only 3% of patients identified an item as confusing and 0.6% as upsetting, which indicates that the questionnaire was clear and did not trigger negative emotional responses. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-trait scaling confirmed the hypothesised QLQ-COMU26 scale structure comprising six multi-item scales and four single items (RMSEA = 0.025). Reliability was good for all scales (internal consistency > 0.70; test-retest reliability > 0.85). Convergent validity was supported by correlations of ≥ 0.50 with related scales of the IN-PATSAT32 and correlations < 0.30 with unrelated QLQ-C30 scales. Known-groups validity was shown according to sex, education, levels of anxiety and depression, satisfaction with communication, disease stage and treatment intention, professional evaluated, and having a companion during the visit. The QLQ-COMU26 captured changes over time in groups that were defined based on changes in the item of satisfaction with communication.

Conclusion: The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 is a reliable and valid measure of patients' perceptions of their communication with HCPs. The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 can be used in daily clinical practice and research and in various cancer patient groups from different cultures. This questionnaire can help to improve communication between patients and healthcare professionals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.
期刊最新文献
A COSMIN systematic review of instruments for evaluating health-related quality of life in people with Hereditary Angioedema. Patients reported outcome of cognitive function scale: a psychometric evaluation. Tools used to measure quality of life in adults with cystic fibrosis- a systematic review. Assessing the validity and reliability of the Indonesian version of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Health Scale v1.2. Relationship between social support, functional outcomes and health-related quality of life in working-aged adults at three months after ischemic stroke: results from the FRAILTY study.
×
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