nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.02.2014 | Brief Communication

The Functional Living Index-Cancer is a reliable and valid instrument in Chinese cancer patients

verfasst von: Daniel Y. T. Fong, Alvina H. K. Lee, Stewart Y. Tung, Janet Y. H. Wong, Y. M. Chan, Cynthia R. Goh, Y. B. Cheung

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 1/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the linguistic and psychometric properties of the Functional Living Index-Cancer (FLIC) in assessing the quality of life of Chinese cancer patients.

Methods

The English FLIC was translated into Traditional Chinese by the standard forward–backward procedure. After cognitive debriefing, a Traditional Chinese FLIC was administered to 500 cancer patients in a major public hospital in Hong Kong. Of which, 200 were invited to complete the questionnaire in 2 weeks. To identify a scale structure appropriate to Chinese, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed on two randomly split halves of the sample.

Results

We identified five scales of the Traditional Chinese FLIC which assess the physical, psychological, hardship, nausea and social aspects. These five scales and the overall scale demonstrated satisfactory fit and had the alpha coefficient ranged from 0.68 to 0.92. The intra-class correlation coefficient ranged from 0.67 to 0.88. In addition, all FLIC scales were negatively associated with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and, also except for the psychological scale, had lower scores in patients who were treated by chemotherapy.

Conclusions

The Traditional Chinese FLIC is an appropriate health indicator for Chinese cancer patients.

Johnson, J. R., & Temple, R. (1985). Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of new anticancer drugs. Cancer Treatment Reports, 69(10), 1155–1159.PubMed

Schipper, H., Clinch, J., McMurray, A., & Levitt, M. (1984). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Development and validation. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2(5), 472–483.PubMed

Laenen, A., & Alonso, A. (2010). The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Estimating its reliability based on clinical trial data. Quality of Life Research, 19(1), 103–109. doi:10.1007/s11136-009-9568-x.PubMedCrossRef

King, M. T., Dobson, A. J., & Harnett, P. R. (1996). A comparison of two quality-of-life questionnaires for cancer clinical trials: the Functional Living Index-Cancer (FLIC) and the quality of life questionnaire core module (QLQ-C30). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49(1), 21–29.PubMedCrossRef

Goh, C. R., Lee, K. S., Tan, T. C., Wang, T. L., Tan, C. H., Wong, J., et al. (1996). Measuring quality of life in different cultures: Translation of the Functional Living Index for Cancer (FLIC) into Chinese and Malay in Singapore. Annals Academy of Medicine Singapore, 25(3), 323–334.

Cheung, Y. B., Goh, C., Thumboo, J., Khoo, K. S., & Wee, J. (2005). Variability and sample size requirements of quality-of-life measures: A randomized study of three major questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23(22), 4936–4944.PubMedCrossRef

Morrow, G. R., Lindke, J., & Black, P. (1992). Measurement of quality of life in patients: Psychometric analyses of the Functional Living Index-Cancer (FLIC). Quality of Life Research, 1(5), 287–296.PubMedCrossRef

Ruckdeschel, J. C., & Piantadosi, S. (1994). Quality of life in lung cancer surgical adjuvant trials. Chest, 106(6 Suppl), 324S–328S.PubMed

Oken, M. M., Creech, R. H., Tormey, D. C., Horton, J., Davis, T. E., McFadden, E. T., et al. (1982). Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 5(6), 649–655.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Fong, D. Y., Lam, C. L., Mak, K. K., Lo, W. S., Lai, Y. K., Ho, S. Y., et al. (2010). The Short Form-12 Health Survey was a valid instrument in Chinese adolescents. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(9), 1020–1029. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.11.011.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1–9.

12.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453.CrossRef

13.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRef

14.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2d ed., McGraw-Hill series in psychology). New York: McGraw-Hill.

15.

Schipper, H., & Levitt, M. (1985). Measuring quality of life: Risks and benefits. Cancer Treatment Reports, 69(10), 1115–1125.PubMed

16.

Bektas, H. A., & Akdemir, N. (2008). Reliability and validity of the Functional Living Index-Cancer in Turkish cancer patients. Cancer Nursing, 31(1), E1–E7. doi:10.1097/01.NCC.0000305684.51884.1f.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Cheung, Y. B., Ng, G. Y., Wong, L. C., Koo, W. H., Tan, E. H., Tay, M. H., et al. (2003). Measuring quality of life in Chinese cancer patients: A new version of the Functional Living Index for Cancer (Chinese). Annals Academy of Medicine Singapore, 32(3), 376–380.

Titel: The Functional Living Index-Cancer is a reliable and valid instrument in Chinese cancer patients
verfasst von: Daniel Y. T. Fong
Alvina H. K. Lee
Stewart Y. Tung
Janet Y. H. Wong
Y. M. Chan
Cynthia R. Goh
Y. B. Cheung
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2014
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0456-z

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2014

Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)

Poor self-rated health associated with an increased risk of subsequent development of lung cancer

Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative

Reproducibility study of Overactive Bladder Symptom Score questionnaire and its response to treatment (RESORT) in Korean population with overactive bladder symptoms

Depression and painful conditions: patterns of association with health status and health utility ratings in the general population

Erratum to: 20th Annual Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Research