Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 1/2011

01-02-2011

Validation of the FACT-G scale for evaluating quality of life in cancer patients in Colombia

Auteurs: Ricardo Sánchez, Monica Ballesteros, Benjamin J. Arnold

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 1/2011

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Purpose

To validate the FACT-G scale for measuring quality of life of patients with cancer in Colombia.

Methods

The analysis included factor analysis, confirmatory analysis, Rasch analysis, convergent validity, internal consistency (473 patients diagnosed with cancer), test–retest reliability (97 patients evaluated at two different time points) and sensitivity to change (25 patients evaluated before and after an intervention).

Results

A four-factor structure has been found (“Physical well-being”, “Social–family well-being”, “Functional well-being” and “Emotional well-being”). Two subscales (“Emotional well-being” and “Social–family well-being”) have misfitting items. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.89 for the whole scale. None of the items had significant impact on the scale’s alpha when removed. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient indicated test–retest reliability (rho c: 0.64–0.76) adequate to the uses of the tool. Regarding sensitivity to change, repeated measures analysis demonstrated significant change of the score after an intervention [F(3, 72) = 39.89, P = 0.000]. Except for the domain “Social–family well-being”, Pearson’s correlation coefficient between equivalent domain scores on FACT-G and the EORTC QLQC-30 ranged from 0.5 to 0.7.

Conclusions

The FACT-G scale measures a four-factor construct. Results indicate that the FACT-G scale is an instrument that performs consistently over time, with evidence of responsiveness. The finding of misfitting items in two subscales (“Social–family well-being”, and “Emotional well-being”) imposes caution in interpreting the scores of these domains.
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Patrick, D. L., & Bergner, M. (1990). Measurement of health status in the 1990s. Annual Review of Public Health, 11, 165–183.CrossRefPubMed Patrick, D. L., & Bergner, M. (1990). Measurement of health status in the 1990s. Annual Review of Public Health, 11, 165–183.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Leplege, A., & Hunt, S. (1997). The problem of quality of life in medicine. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(1), 47–50.CrossRef Leplege, A., & Hunt, S. (1997). The problem of quality of life in medicine. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(1), 47–50.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Cella, D. F., & Tulsky, D. S. (1993). Quality of life in cancer: Definition, purpose, and method of measurement. Cancer Investigation, 11(3), 327–336.CrossRefPubMed Cella, D. F., & Tulsky, D. S. (1993). Quality of life in cancer: Definition, purpose, and method of measurement. Cancer Investigation, 11(3), 327–336.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Testa, M. A., & Simonson, D. C. (1996). Assessment of quality-of-life outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine, 334(13), 835–840.CrossRefPubMed Testa, M. A., & Simonson, D. C. (1996). Assessment of quality-of-life outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine, 334(13), 835–840.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Frost, M. H., & Sloan, J. A. (2002). Quality of life measurements: A soft outcome—or is it? The American Journal of Managed Care, 8(18), S574–S579.PubMed Frost, M. H., & Sloan, J. A. (2002). Quality of life measurements: A soft outcome—or is it? The American Journal of Managed Care, 8(18), S574–S579.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Bullinger, M. (1996). Assessment of health related quality of life with the SF-36 health survey. Rehabilitation (Stuttg), 35(3), 17–27. Quiz XXVII–XXIX. Bullinger, M. (1996). Assessment of health related quality of life with the SF-36 health survey. Rehabilitation (Stuttg), 35(3), 17–27. Quiz XXVII–XXIX.
7.
go back to reference Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). The European Organization for Research and Treatment Of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85(5), 365–376.CrossRefPubMed Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). The European Organization for Research and Treatment Of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85(5), 365–376.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Cella, D., & Nowinski, C. J. (2002). Measuring quality of life in chronic illness: The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy measurement system. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 83(12 Suppl 2), S10–S17.CrossRefPubMed Cella, D., & Nowinski, C. J. (2002). Measuring quality of life in chronic illness: The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy measurement system. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 83(12 Suppl 2), S10–S17.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Cella, D., Hernandez, L., Bonomi, A. E., Corona, M., Vaquero, M., Shiomoto, G., et al. (1998). Spanish language translation and initial validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy quality-of-life instrument. Medical Care, 36(9), 1407–1418.CrossRefPubMed Cella, D., Hernandez, L., Bonomi, A. E., Corona, M., Vaquero, M., Shiomoto, G., et al. (1998). Spanish language translation and initial validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy quality-of-life instrument. Medical Care, 36(9), 1407–1418.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Lee, E. H., Chun, M., Kang, S., & Lee, H. J. (2004). Validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale for measuring the health-related quality of life in Korean women with breast cancer. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, 34(7), 393–399.CrossRefPubMed Lee, E. H., Chun, M., Kang, S., & Lee, H. J. (2004). Validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale for measuring the health-related quality of life in Korean women with breast cancer. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, 34(7), 393–399.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Conroy, T., Mercier, M., Bonneterre, J., Luporsi, E., Lefebvre, J. L., Lapeyre, M., et al. (2004). French version of FACT-G: Validation and comparison with other cancer-specific instruments. European Journal of Cancer, 40(15), 2243–2252.CrossRefPubMed Conroy, T., Mercier, M., Bonneterre, J., Luporsi, E., Lefebvre, J. L., Lapeyre, M., et al. (2004). French version of FACT-G: Validation and comparison with other cancer-specific instruments. European Journal of Cancer, 40(15), 2243–2252.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Costet, N., Lapierre, V., Benhamou, E., & Le Gales, C. (2005). Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) in French cancer patients. Quality of Life Research, 14(5), 1427–1432.CrossRefPubMed Costet, N., Lapierre, V., Benhamou, E., & Le Gales, C. (2005). Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) in French cancer patients. Quality of Life Research, 14(5), 1427–1432.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Thomas, B. C., Pandey, M., Ramdas, K., Sebastian, P., & Nair, M. K. (2004). FACT-G: Reliability and validity of the Malayalam translation. Quality of Life Research, 13(1), 263–269.CrossRefPubMed Thomas, B. C., Pandey, M., Ramdas, K., Sebastian, P., & Nair, M. K. (2004). FACT-G: Reliability and validity of the Malayalam translation. Quality of Life Research, 13(1), 263–269.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Fumimoto, H., Kobayashi, K., Chang, C. H., Eremenco, S., Fujiki, Y., Uemura, S., et al. (2001). Cross-cultural validation of an international questionnaire, the general measure of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale (FACT-G), for Japanese. Quality of Life Research, 10(8), 701–709.CrossRefPubMed Fumimoto, H., Kobayashi, K., Chang, C. H., Eremenco, S., Fujiki, Y., Uemura, S., et al. (2001). Cross-cultural validation of an international questionnaire, the general measure of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale (FACT-G), for Japanese. Quality of Life Research, 10(8), 701–709.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Holzner, B., Bode, R. K., Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Kopp, M., Sperner-Unterweger, B., et al. (2006). Equating EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scores and its use in oncological research. European Journal of Cancer, 42(18), 3169–3177.CrossRefPubMed Holzner, B., Bode, R. K., Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Kopp, M., Sperner-Unterweger, B., et al. (2006). Equating EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scores and its use in oncological research. European Journal of Cancer, 42(18), 3169–3177.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Bonomi, A. E., Cella, D. F., Hahn, E. A., Bjordal, K., Sperner-Unterweger, B., Gangeri, L., et al. (1996). Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Quality of Life Research, 5(3), 309–320.CrossRefPubMed Bonomi, A. E., Cella, D. F., Hahn, E. A., Bjordal, K., Sperner-Unterweger, B., Gangeri, L., et al. (1996). Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Quality of Life Research, 5(3), 309–320.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Bravo, M., Canino, G. J., Rubio-Stipec, M., & Woodbury-Farina, M. (1991). A cross-cultural adaptation of a psychiatric epidemiologic instrument: The diagnostic interview schedule’s adaptation in Puerto Rico. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 15(1), 1–18.CrossRefPubMed Bravo, M., Canino, G. J., Rubio-Stipec, M., & Woodbury-Farina, M. (1991). A cross-cultural adaptation of a psychiatric epidemiologic instrument: The diagnostic interview schedule’s adaptation in Puerto Rico. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 15(1), 1–18.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Dapueto, J. J., Francolino, C., Gotta, I., Levin, R., Alonso, I., Barrios, E., et al. (2001). Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaire (FACT-G) in a South American Spanish speaking population. Psycho-oncology, 10(1), 88–92.CrossRefPubMed Dapueto, J. J., Francolino, C., Gotta, I., Levin, R., Alonso, I., Barrios, E., et al. (2001). Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaire (FACT-G) in a South American Spanish speaking population. Psycho-oncology, 10(1), 88–92.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Smith, A. B., Wright, P., Selby, P. J., & Velikova, G. (2007). A Rasch and factor analysis of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). Health Qual Life Outcomes, 5, 19.CrossRefPubMed Smith, A. B., Wright, P., Selby, P. J., & Velikova, G. (2007). A Rasch and factor analysis of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). Health Qual Life Outcomes, 5, 19.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Dapueto, J. J., Francolino, C., Servente, L., Chang, C. H., Gotta, I., Levin, R., et al. (2003). Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Spanish Version 4 in South America: Classic psychometric and item response theory analyses. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 1, 32.CrossRefPubMed Dapueto, J. J., Francolino, C., Servente, L., Chang, C. H., Gotta, I., Levin, R., et al. (2003). Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Spanish Version 4 in South America: Classic psychometric and item response theory analyses. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 1, 32.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2007). LISREL 8.80. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2007). LISREL 8.80. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
22.
go back to reference Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing Lisrel: A guide for the uninitiated. London: SAGE. Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2000). Introducing Lisrel: A guide for the uninitiated. London: SAGE.
23.
go back to reference Hu, L. T. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRef Hu, L. T. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Linacre, J. M. (2002). Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3(1), 85–106.PubMed Linacre, J. M. (2002). Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3(1), 85–106.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Wright, B., & Linacre, M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(3), 370. Wright, B., & Linacre, M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(3), 370.
26.
go back to reference Linacre, J. M. (2005). User’s guide to winsteps. Chicago: Mesa Press. Linacre, J. M. (2005). User’s guide to winsteps. Chicago: Mesa Press.
27.
go back to reference Lin, L., & Torbeck, L. D. (1998). Coefficient of accuracy and concordance correlation coefficient: New statistics for methods comparison. PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, 52(2), 55–59.PubMed Lin, L., & Torbeck, L. D. (1998). Coefficient of accuracy and concordance correlation coefficient: New statistics for methods comparison. PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, 52(2), 55–59.PubMed
28.
go back to reference Revelle, W., & Rocklin, T. (1979). Very simple structure: An alternative procedure for estimating the optimal number of interpretable factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14, 403–414.CrossRef Revelle, W., & Rocklin, T. (1979). Very simple structure: An alternative procedure for estimating the optimal number of interpretable factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 14, 403–414.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
30.
go back to reference Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2006). A first course in structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2006). A first course in structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31.
go back to reference Porter, L. S., Keefe, F. J., Garst, J., McBride, C. M., & Baucom, D. (2008). Self-efficacy for managing pain, symptoms, and function in patients with lung cancer and their informal caregivers: associations with symptoms and distress. Pain, 137(2), 306–315.CrossRefPubMed Porter, L. S., Keefe, F. J., Garst, J., McBride, C. M., & Baucom, D. (2008). Self-efficacy for managing pain, symptoms, and function in patients with lung cancer and their informal caregivers: associations with symptoms and distress. Pain, 137(2), 306–315.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Pett, M. A., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Pub. Pett, M. A., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Pub.
33.
go back to reference Wright, B., & Masters, G. N. (2002). Number of persons or item strata. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(3), 888. Wright, B., & Masters, G. N. (2002). Number of persons or item strata. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(3), 888.
34.
go back to reference Wright, B. D. (1998). Interpreting reliabilities. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 11(4), 602. Wright, B. D. (1998). Interpreting reliabilities. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 11(4), 602.
35.
go back to reference Vega, W. A. (1990). Hispanic families in the 1980s: Adecade of research. Journal of marriage and the family, 52, 1015–1024.CrossRef Vega, W. A. (1990). Hispanic families in the 1980s: Adecade of research. Journal of marriage and the family, 52, 1015–1024.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Florez, K. R., Aguirre, A. N., Viladrich, A., Cespedes, A., De La Cruz, A. A., & Abraido-Lanza, A. F. (2009). Fatalism or destiny? A qualitative study and interpretative framework on Dominican women’s breast cancer beliefs. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 11(4), 291–301.CrossRefPubMed Florez, K. R., Aguirre, A. N., Viladrich, A., Cespedes, A., De La Cruz, A. A., & Abraido-Lanza, A. F. (2009). Fatalism or destiny? A qualitative study and interpretative framework on Dominican women’s breast cancer beliefs. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 11(4), 291–301.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Karabatsos, G. (2000). A critique of Rasch residual fit statistics. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1(2), 152–176.PubMed Karabatsos, G. (2000). A critique of Rasch residual fit statistics. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1(2), 152–176.PubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Validation of the FACT-G scale for evaluating quality of life in cancer patients in Colombia
Auteurs
Ricardo Sánchez
Monica Ballesteros
Benjamin J. Arnold
Publicatiedatum
01-02-2011
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9727-0

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2011

Quality of Life Research 1/2011 Naar de uitgave