Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey

被引:5
|
作者
Koller, Michael [1 ]
Mueller, Karolina [1 ]
Nolte, Sandra [2 ]
Schmidt, Heike [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Harvey, Christina [6 ]
Moelle, Ulrike [7 ]
Boehm, Andreas [7 ]
Engeler, Daniel [8 ]
Metzger, Juerg [9 ]
Sztankay, Monika [10 ,11 ]
Holzner, Bernhard [10 ,11 ]
Groenvold, Mogens [12 ]
Kulis, Dagmara [13 ]
Bottomley, Andrew [13 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Regensburg, Ctr Clin Studies, D-93042 Regensburg, Germany
[2] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Div Psychosomat Med Berlin, Berlin, Germany
[3] Martin Luther Univ Halle Wittenberg, Inst Hlth & Nursing Sci, Halle, Saale, Germany
[4] Univ Hosp Halle Saale, Dept Radiat Med, Univ Clin, Halle, Saale, Germany
[5] Univ Hosp Halle Saale, Outpatient Clin Radiotherapy, Halle, Saale, Germany
[6] St Marienworth Hosp, Bad Kreuznach, Germany
[7] St Georg Hosp, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Leipzig, Germany
[8] Cantonal Hosp St Gallen, Dept Urol, St Gallen, Switzerland
[9] Cantonal Hosp Lucerne, Dept Gen Surg, Luzern, Switzerland
[10] Med Univ Innsbruck, Dept Psychiat Psychotherapy & Psychosomat, Innsbruck, Austria
[11] Univ Hosp Psychiat II, Innsbruck, Austria
[12] Univ Copenhagen, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hosp, Dept Geriatr & Palliat Med, Palliat Care Res Unit, Copenhagen, Denmark
[13] EORTC Headquarters, Qual Life Dept, Brussels, Belgium
关键词
Quality-of-life; Patient-reported outcomes; Response scales; Responder behaviour; Cognitive processes; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; VALIDATION; INSTRUMENT; DOMAINS;
D O I
10.1186/s12955-021-01866-x
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The European Organization for research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) scales are scored on a 4-point response scale, ranging from not at all to very much. Previous studies have shown that the German translation of the response option quite a bit as massig violates interval scale assumptions, and that ziemlich is a more appropriate translation. The present studies investigated differences between the two questionnaire versions. Methods: The first study employed a balanced cross-over design and included 450 patients with different types of cancer from three German-speaking countries. The second study was a representative survey in Germany including 2033 respondents. The main analyses included compared the ziemlich and massig version of the questionnaire using analyses of covariance adjusted for sex, age, and health burden. Results: In accordance with our hypothesis, the adjusted summary score was lower in the massig than in the ziemlich version; Study 1: - 4.5 (95% CI - 7.8 to - 1.3), p = 0.006, Study 2: - 3.1 (95% CI - 4.6 to - 1.5), p < 0.001. In both studies, this effect was pronounced in respondents with a higher health burden; Study 1: - 6.8 (95% CI - 12.2 to - 1.4), p = 0.013; Study 2: - 4.5 (95% CI - 7.3 to - 1.7), p = 0.002. Conclusions: We found subtle but consistent differences between the two questionnaire versions. We recommend to use the optimized response option for the EORTC QLQ-C30 as well as for all other German modules.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey
    Michael Koller
    Karolina Müller
    Sandra Nolte
    Heike Schmidt
    Christina Harvey
    Ulrike Mölle
    Andreas Boehm
    Daniel Engeler
    Jürg Metzger
    Monika Sztankay
    Bernhard Holzner
    Mogens Groenvold
    Dagmara Kuliś
    Andrew Bottomley
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19
  • [2] Investigating the German response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in a sample of cancer patients and in a norm data reference survey
    Koller, Michael
    Mueller, Karolina
    Nolte, Sandra
    Schmidt, Heike
    Harvey, Christina
    Moelle, Ulrike
    Boehm, Andreas
    Engeler, Daniel
    Metzger, Jurg
    Sztankay, Monika
    Holzner, Bernhard
    Holzner, Bernhard
    Groenvold, Mogens
    Kulis, Dagmara
    Bottomley, Andrew
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2020, 29 (SUPPL 1) : S169 - S169
  • [3] Normative Data of the EORTC QLQ-C30 For the German Population: A Population-Based Survey
    Waldmann, Annika
    Schubert, Daniel
    Katalinic, Alexander
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (09):
  • [4] The validity of EORTC QLQ-C30 fatigue scale in advanced cancer patients and cancer survivors
    Knobel, H
    Loge, JH
    Brenne, E
    Fayers, P
    Hjermstad, MJ
    Kaasa, S
    PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2003, 17 (08) : 664 - 672
  • [5] Normative data of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in Germany: a population-based survey
    Waldmann, Annika
    Schubert, Daniel
    Katalinic, Alexander
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2013, 22
  • [6] Normative data of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in Germany: A population-based survey
    Waldmann, A.
    Schubert, D.
    Katalinic, A.
    ONCOLOGY RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2014, 37 : 111 - 112
  • [7] Understanding the reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in Turkish cancer patients
    Cankurtaran, E. S.
    Ozalp, E.
    Soygur, H.
    Ozer, S.
    Akbiyik, D. I.
    Bottomley, A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, 2008, 17 (01) : 98 - 104
  • [8] The Portuguese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30
    Ferreira, P
    10TH INTERNATIONAL MEETING OF GYNAECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY, 1997, : 527 - 532
  • [9] Minimal important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with advanced cancer
    Bedard, Gillian
    Zeng, Liang
    Zhang, Liying
    Lauzon, Natalie
    Holden, Lori
    Tsao, May
    Danjoux, Cyril
    Barnes, Elizabeth
    Sahgal, Arjun
    Poon, Michael
    Chow, Edward
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 10 (02) : 109 - 117
  • [10] Measuring functional domains with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and MDASI in patients with cancer
    Shi, Qiuling
    Wang, Xin Shelley
    Williams, Loretta A.
    Mendoza, Tito R.
    Orlowski, Robert Z.
    Cleeland, Charles S.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2014, 23 : 124 - 124