Reliability of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 to Assess Cancer Patients’ Information Needs

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32635/2176-9745.RBC.2022v68n3.2151

Keywords:

patient satisfaction/statistics & numerical data, validation study, reproducibility of results, health communication, neoplasms

Abstract

Introduction: Most patients do not have a satisfactory degree of understanding about cancer. For the information communication process to be truly effective, it is necessary to identify the patient’s level of knowledge beforehand. Objective: To verify the test-retest stability of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 instrument, in its Brazilian Portuguese version, to assess cancer patient’s information needs. Method: The instrument was applied in 253 patients hospitalized in the clinical and surgical wards of a high-complexity cancer treatment hospital located in the city of Rio de Janeiro through the application of a questionnaire in an individual interview. To test the adequacy of the measurement process, 85 patients adhered to the retest, with an interval of 7 to 15 days. Data were entered into a database by independent double typing in the Excel program, and the analysis was performed using simple and weighted Kappa statistics. Results: Responses were stable, and test-retest reliability estimates ranged from good to excellent (0.66 to 0.99). The instrument also demonstrated good stability when applied to other populations and patients with different types of cancer. Conclusion: The EORTEC QLQ-INFO25 instrument can contribute for the measurement of patient satisfaction in relation to their need for information since the results suggest a high stability of information, making its applicability in the Brazilian population viable.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. doi: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492 Erratum in: CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Jul;70(4):313. doi: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492

Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva. Estimativa 2020: incidência de câncer no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: INCA; 2019 [acesso 2020 maio 5]. Disponível em: https://www.inca.gov.br/sites/ufu.sti.inca.local/files/media/document/estimativa-2020-incidencia-de-cancer-no-brasil.pdf

Jesus LG, Cicchelli MQ, Martins GB, et al. Estudo epidemiológico e nível de conhecimento de pacientes oncológicos acerca da mucosite oral e laserterapia. Cienc Cuid Saúde. 2017;16(1):1-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.4025/cienccuidsaude.v16i1.30871 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4025/cienccuidsaude.v16i1.30871

Trintenaro JC, Paes AP, Ventura AS. Paciente oncológico frente ao conhecimento da doença. Rev PSIQUE [Internet]. 2016 [acesso 2020 maio 5];1(2):52-68. Disponível em: https://seer.cesjf.br/index.php/psq/article/view/946

Bonin CDB, Santos RZ, Ghisi GLM, et al. Construção e validação do questionário de conhecimentos para pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2014;102(4):364-73. doi: https://doi.org/10.5935/abc.20140032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5935/abc.20140032

Mendonça FAC, Pinheiro CPO, Quintino ASB, et al. Conhecimento da mulher mastectomizada frente ao processo de adoecimento e tratamento do câncer de mama. Atas Invest Qualitativa Saúde [Internet]. 2018 [acesso 2020 maio 5];2:1479-86. Disponível em: https://www.proceedings.ciaiq.org/index.php/ciaiq2018/article/view/1933/1883

Arraras JI, Greimel E, Sezer O, et al. An international validation study of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 questionnaire: an instrument to assess the information given to cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(15):2726-38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.06.118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.06.118

Carvalho MS, Belmiro AAMLM, Rocha LF, et al. Equivalência conceitual, semântica e operacional da versão brasileira do EORTC QLQ-INFOR25. Arch Health Sci [Internet]. 2019 [acesso 2020 maio 5];26(1):32. Disponível em: https://redib.org/Record/oai_articulo2212126-equival%C3%AAncia-conceitual-sem%C3%A2ntica-e-operacional-da-vers%C3%A3o-brasileira-do-eortc-qlq-infor25 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17696/2318-3691.26.1.2019.1243

Herdman M, Fox-Rushby J, Badia X. A model of equivalence in the cultural adaptation of HRQOL instruments: the universalist approach. Qual Life Res. 1998;7(4):323-35. Cited in: PubMed; PMID 9610216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008846618880

Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-74. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

Conselho Nacional de Saúde (BR). Resolução nº 466, de 12 de dezembro de 2012. Aprova as diretrizes e normas regulamentadoras de pesquisas envolvendo seres humanos [Internet]. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, DF. 2013 jun 13 [acesso 2020 abr 6]; Seção 1:59. Disponível em: https://conselho.saude.gov.br/resolucoes/2012/Reso466.pdf

Singer S, Engelberg PM, Weißflog G, et al. Construct validity of the EORTC quality of life questionnaire information module. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(1):123-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0114-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0114-x

Arraras JI, Manterola A, Hernández B, et al. The EORTC information questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-INFO25. Validation study for Spanish patients. Clin Transl Oncol. 2011;13(6):401-10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-011-0674-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-011-0674-1

Püsküllüoǧlu M, Tomaszewski KA, Zygulska AL, et al. Pilot testing and preliminary psychometric validation of the polish translation of the EORTC INFO25 questionnaire: validation of the polish version of INFO25-pilot study. Appl Res Qual Life. 2014;9(3):525-35. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-013-9250-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-013-9250-x

Asadi-lari M, Ahmadi Pishkuhi M, Almasi-Hashiani A, et al. Validation study of the EORTC information questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-INFO25) in Iranian cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2015;23(7):1875-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2510-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2510-y

Efficace F, Boccadoro M, Palumbo A, et al. A prospective observational study to assess clinical decision-making, prognosis, quality of life and satisfaction with care in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: the CLARITY study protocol. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16(1):127. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0953-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0953-4

Cruz A, Rodrigues A, Ferracini A, et al. Analysis of information received during treatment and adherence to tamoxifen in breast cancer patients. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2017;21(4):295-98. doi: https://doi.org/10.5114/wo.2017.72397 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/wo.2017.72397

Cuypers M, Lamers RED, Vries M et al. Prostate cancer survivors with a passive role preference in treatment decision-making are less satisfied with information received: results from the PROFILES registry. Urol Oncol. 2016;34(11):482.e11-482.e18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.06.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.06.015

Pinto AC, Ferreira-Santos F, Dal Lago L, et al. Information perception, wishes, and satisfaction in ambulatory cancer patients under active treatment: patient-reported outcomes with QLQ-INFO25. Ecancermedicalscience. 2014;8:425. doi: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2014.425 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2014.425

Pereira Junior M, Santos RZ, Ramos AP, et al. Construção e validação psicométrica do câncer-Q: questionário de conhecimentos da doença para pacientes com câncer. Rev Bras Cancerol. 2018;64(2):177-88. doi: https://doi.org/10.32635/2176-9745.RBC.2018v64n2.76 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32635/2176-9745.RBC.2018v64n2.76

Santos RZ, Bonin CDB, Martins EC, et al. Construção e validação psicométrica do HIPER-Q para avaliar o conhecimento de pacientes hipertensos em reabilitação cardíaca. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2018;110(1):60-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.5935/abc.20170183 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5935/abc.20170183

Chua GP, Tan HK, Gandhi M. What information do cancer patients want and how well are their needs being met? Ecancermedicalscience. 2018;12:873. doi: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2018.873 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2018.873

Silva DGF, Souza ALLP, Martins TCF, et al. Quality of information given to surgical patients with abdominal cancer. Investig Educ Enferm. 2017;35(2):221-31. doi: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.iee.v35n2a11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.iee.v35n2a11

Barbosa AN, Nascimento IA, Carvalho MJS, et al. A importância da assistência humanizada prestada pelo enfermeiro nos cuidados paliativos ao paciente oncológico terminal. Rev Bras Interdiscip Saúde [Internet]. 2019 [acesso 2020 maio 24];1(4):92-6. Disponível em: https://revistarebis.rebis.com.br/index.php/rebis/article/view/58/54

Tzelepis F, Sanson-Fisher RW, Zucca AC, et al. Measuring the quality of patient-centered care: Why patient-reported measures are critical to reliable assessment. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:831-5. doi: https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S81975 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S81975

Berger O, Grønberg BH, Loge JH, et al. Cancer patients’ knowledge about their disease and treatment before, during and after treatment: a prospective, longitudinal study. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):381. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4164-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4164-5

Published

2022-07-29

How to Cite

1.
Rodrigues CF, Martins TC de F, Muzi CD, Coutinho JVA, Jomar RT, Guimarães RM. Reliability of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 to Assess Cancer Patients’ Information Needs. Rev. Bras. Cancerol. [Internet]. 2022 Jul. 29 [cited 2024 Jul. 3];68(3):e-072151. Available from: https://rbc.inca.gov.br/index.php/revista/article/view/2151

Issue

Section

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Most read articles by the same author(s)