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
  • [21] The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire for cancer patients (QLQ-C30): Australian general population reference values
    Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca
    Costa, Daniel S. J.
    Norman, Richard
    Janda, Monika
    Smith, David P.
    Grimison, Peter
    Gamper, Eva-Marie
    King, Madeleine T.
    MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2019, 210 (11) : 499 - 506
  • [22] German utility weights for the EORTC QLQ-C30: first results of a general population survey using discrete choice experiments
    Kemmler, Georg
    Gamper, Eva-Maria
    Nerich, Virginie
    Norman, Richard
    King, Madeleine
    Holzner, Bernhard
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2015, 24 : 180 - 180
  • [23] Psychometric properties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in Uganda
    Naamala, Allen
    Eriksson, Lars E.
    Orem, Jackson
    Nalwadda, Gorrette K.
    Kabir, Zarina Nahar
    Wettergren, Lena
    HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2021, 19 (01)
  • [24] Assessing measurement invariance in the EORTC QLQ-C30
    Janneke van Roij
    Jacobien M. Kieffer
    Lonneke van de Poll-Franse
    Olga Husson
    Natasja J. H. Raijmakers
    John Gelissen
    Quality of Life Research, 2022, 31 : 889 - 901
  • [25] Normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30 from the Austrian general population
    Jens Lehmann
    Johannes M. Giesinger
    Sandra Nolte
    Monika Sztankay
    Lisa M. Wintner
    Gregor Liegl
    Matthias Rose
    Bernhard Holzner
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 18
  • [26] Normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30 from the Austrian general population
    Lehmann, Jens
    Giesinger, Johannes M.
    Nolte, Sandra
    Sztankay, Monika
    Wintner, Lisa M.
    Liegl, Gregor
    Rose, Matthias
    Holzner, Bernhard
    HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2020, 18 (01)
  • [27] Quality of life research within the EORTC - the EORTC QLQ-C30
    Fayers, P
    Bottomley, A
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2002, 38 : S125 - S133
  • [28] Psychometric properties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in Uganda
    Allen Naamala
    Lars E. Eriksson
    Jackson Orem
    Gorrette K. Nalwadda
    Zarina Nahar Kabir
    Lena Wettergren
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19
  • [29] Assessing measurement invariance in the EORTC QLQ-C30
    van Roij, Janneke
    Kieffer, Jacobien M.
    van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke
    Husson, Olga
    Raijmakers, Natasja J. H.
    Gelissen, John
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2022, 31 (03) : 889 - 901
  • [30] Validation of the Korean version of the EORTC QLQ-C30
    Y.H. Yun
    Y.S. Park
    E.S. Lee
    S.-M. Bang
    D.S. Heo
    S.Y. Park
    C.H. You
    K. West
    Quality of Life Research, 2004, 13 : 863 - 868