한국전문물리치료학회지 (Physical Therapy Korea)

  • 제27권2호
  • /
  • Pages.111-117
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1225-8962(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-982X(eISSN)
한국전문물리치료학회 (Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

암 환자에 대한 한국어판 FACIT-호흡곤란 10개 항목 단축형 설문지의 신뢰도와 타당도 분석

Reliability and Validity of Korean Version of FACIT-dyspnea 10 Item Short Form in Patients With Cancer

  • 구본일 (청주대학교 대학원 물리치료학과) ;
  • 오덕원 (청주대학교 보건의료과학대학 물리치료학과) ;
  • 이민지 (대전대학교 대전한방병원 물리치료실) ;
  • 김성경 (뉴라이프요양병원 물리치료실)
  • Ku, Bon-il (Department of Physical Therapy, The Graduate School, Cheongju University) ;
  • Oh, Duck-won (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Medical Science, Cheongju University) ;
  • Lee, Min-ji (Department of Physical Therapy, Korean Medicine Hospital of Daejeon University) ;
  • Kim, Seong-kyeong (Department of Physical Therapy, New Life Convalescence Hospital)
  • 투고 : 2020.01.10
  • 심사 : 2020.04.17
  • 발행 : 2020.05.20
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) for Dyspnea was developed to assess multidimensional dyspnea using two subscales (experience of dyspnea and functional limitation) and a total score. Objects: This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the FACIT-dyspnea 10-item short form questionnaire (FACIT-dyspnea-K). Methods: Subjects were 163 patients with cancer. Dyspnea-related scales (modified Medical Research Council scale [mMRC], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 [EORTC QLQ-C30], Hospital Anxiety and Depression [HAD], and WHO Performance Scale) were used to validate the FACIT-dyspnea-K. Results: Internal consistency was confirmed by Cronbach's alpha values of 0.90 and 0.95 in factors 1 and 2, respectively. Convergence validity was determined by comparing the two factors and total score of the FACIT-dyspnea-K with conceptually related assessment tools measuring the physical and emotional effects of dyspnea, with which correlations ranged from 0.364 to 0.567. Criterion validity was established by significant differences in the FACIT-dyspnea-K score between groups when the patients were classified by performance status as assessed by the WHO performance scale. Furthermore, the FACIT-dyspnea-K showed notable correlations with other dyspnea scales (mMRC, EORTC QLQ-C30, and HAD) for cancer patients (r = 0.28 to 0.54). The test-retest reliability of the two factors and total score of the FACIT-dyspnea-K appeared to be excellent (Cronbach's alpha = 0.96 to 0.97). Conclusion: This study supports FACIT-dyspnea-K as a valid and reliable instrument to assess the dyspnea experience of cancer patients in clinical settings.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. American Thoracic Society. Dyspnea. Mechanisms, assessment, and management: a consensus statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;159(1):321-40. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.159.1.ats898
  2. Ander DS, Aisiku IP, Ratcliff JJ, Todd KH, Gotsch K. Measuring the dyspnea of decompensated heart failure with a visual analog scale: how much improvement is meaningful? Congest Heart Fail 2004;10(4):188-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-5299.2004.03475.x
  3. Henoch I, Bergman B, Gaston-Johansson F. Validation of a Swedish version of the cancer dyspnea scale. J Pain Symptom Manage 2006;31(4):353-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.02.002
  4. Koelwyn GJ, Jones LW, Hornsby W, Eves ND. Exercise therapy in the management of dyspnea in patients with cancer. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care 2012;6(2):129-37. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0b013e32835391dc
  5. Thomas JR, Von Gunten CF. Treatment of dyspnea in cancer patients. Oncology (Williston Park) 2002;16(6):745-50; discussion 750, 755, 758-60.
  6. van der Molen B. Dyspnoea: a study of measurement instruments for the assessment of dyspnoea and their application for patients with advanced cancer. J Adv Nurs 1995;22(5):948-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1995.tb02647.x
  7. Tanaka K, Akechi T, Okuyama T, Nishiwaki Y, Uchitomi Y. Development and validation of the cancer dyspnoea scale: a multidimensional, brief, self-rating scale. Br J Cancer 2000;82(4):800-5. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.1999.1002
  8. Yount SE, Choi SW, Victorson D, Ruo B, Cella D, Anton S, et al. Brief, valid measures of dyspnea and related functional limitations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Value Health 2011;14(2):307-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.009
  9. Hinchcliff ME, Beaumont JL, Carns MA, Podlusky S, Thavarajah K, Varga J, et al. Longitudinal evaluation of PROMIS-29 and FACIT-dyspnea short forms in systemic sclerosis. J Rheumatol 2015;42(1):64-72. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.140143
  10. Perez T, Burgel PR, Paillasseur JL, Caillaud D, Deslee G, Chanez P, et al.; INITIATIVES BPCO Scientific Committee. Modified Medical Research Council scale vs Baseline Dyspnea Index to evaluate dyspnea in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2015;10:1663-72. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S82408
  11. Mahler DA, Ward J, Waterman LA, McCusker C, ZuWallack R, Baird JC. Patient-reported dyspnea in COPD reliability and association with stage of disease. Chest 2009;136(6):1473-9. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.09-0934
  12. Yun YH, Park YS, Lee ES, Bang SM, Heo DS, Park SY, et al. Validation of the Korean version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 2004;13(4):863-8. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:QURE.0000021692.81214.70
  13. Ayana BA, Negash S, Yusuf L, Tigeneh W, Haile D. Reliability and validity of amharic version of EORTC QLQ-C 30 questionnaire among gynecological cancer patients in Ethiopia. PLoS One 2016;11(6):e0157359. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157359
  14. Oh SM, Min KJ, Park DB. A study on the standardization of the hospital anxiety and depression scale for Koreans: a comparison of normal, depressed and anxious groups. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc 1999;38(2):289-96.
  15. Addy C, Sephton M, Suntharalingam J, De Winton E, Masani V, Taylor G. Assessment of performance status in lung cancer - do oncologists and respiratory physicians agree? Lung Cancer 2012;75(Suppl 1):S17-8.
  16. Kline P. The new psychometrics: science, psychology, and measurement. London: Routledge; 1998;53.
  17. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56(8):730-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00084-2
  18. Choi SW, Victorson DE, Yount S, Anton S, Cella D. Development of a conceptual framework and calibrated item banks to measure patient-reported dyspnea severity and related functional limitations. Value Health 2011;14(2):291-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.06.001
  19. Rothstein JM, Echternach JL. Primer on measurement: an introductory guide to measurement issues. Alexandria: American Physical Therapy Association; 1993.
  20. Fermanian J. [Measuring agreement between 2 observers: a quantitative case]. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 1984;32(6):408-13. French.
  21. Ferrer M, Alonso J, Morera J, Marrades RM, Khalaf A, Aguar MC, et al. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease stage and health-related quality of life. The quality of life of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease study group. Ann Intern Med 1997;127(12):1072-9. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-127-12-199712150-00003
  22. Bailey PH. The dyspnea-anxiety-dyspnea cycle--COPD patients' stories of breathlessness: "it's scary /when you can't breathe". Qual Health Res 2004;14(6):760-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304265973
  23. Mahler DA, Tomlinson D, Olmstead EM, Tosteson AN, O'Connor GT. Changes in dyspnea, health status, and lung function in chronic airway disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;151(1):61-5. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.151.1.7812573