Article

Validation of a core outcome measure for palliative care in Africa: the APCA African Palliative Outcome Scale.

Dept Palliative Care, King's College London, Weston Education Centre, Denmark Hill, London SE5 9RJ, UK.
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (Impact Factor: 2.27). 01/2010; 8:10. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-10
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Despite the burden of progressive incurable disease in Africa, there is almost no evidence on patient care or outcomes. A primary reason has been the lack of appropriate locally-validated outcome tools. This study aimed to validate a multidimensional scale (the APCA African Palliative Outcome Scale) in a multi-centred international study.
Validation was conducted across 5 African services and in 3 phases: Phase 1. Face validity: content analysis of qualitative interviews and cognitive interviewing of POS; Phase 2. Construct validity: correlation of POS with Missoula-Vitas Quality of Life Index (Spearman's rank tests); Phase 3. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha calculated twice using 2 datasets), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients calculated for 2 time points) and time to complete (calculated twice using 2 datasets).
The validation involved 682 patients and 437 family carers, interviewed in 8 different languages. Phase 1. Qualitative interviews (N = 90 patients; N = 38 carers) showed POS items mapped well onto identified needs; cognitive interviews (N = 73 patients; N = 29 carers) demonstrated good interpretation; Phase 2. POS-MVQoLI Spearman's rank correlations were low-moderate as expected (N = 285); Phase 3. (N = 307, 2nd assessment mean 21.2 hours after first, SD 7.2) Cronbach's Alpha was 0.6 on both datasets, indicating expected moderate internal consistency; test-retest found high intra-class correlation coefficients for all items (0.78-0.89); median time to complete 7 mins, reducing to 5 mins at second visit.
The APCA African POS has sound psychometric properties, is well comprehended and brief to use. Application of this tool offers the opportunity to at last address the omissions of palliative care research in Africa.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
121 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An evidence-based basic care package (BCP) of seven interventions (Family testing, Cotrimoxazole, Condoms, Multivitamins, Access to safe water treatment, Isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT), and Insecticide-treated bednet) has been advocated to prevent infections among people with HIV in low-income settings. We examined the availability and receipt of the BCP in HIV outpatient clinics in Kenya and Uganda. A survey of 120 PEPFAR-funded facilities determined the services offered. At each of the 12 largest facilities, a longitudinal cohort of 100 patients was recruited to examine care received and health status over three months. The full BCP was offered in 14% (n = 17/120) of facilities; interventions most commonly offered were Support for family testing (87%) and Condoms (87%), and least commonly IPT (38%). Patients (n = 1335) most commonly reported receiving Cotrimoxazole (57%) and Multivitamins (36%), and least commonly IPT (4%), directly from the facility attended. The BCP (excluding Isoniazid) was received by 3% of patients directly from the facility and 24% from any location. BCP receipt was associated with using antiretroviral therapy (ART; OR 1.1 (95% CI 1.0-1.1), receipt from any location) but not with patient gender, wealth, education level or health. The BCP should be offered at more HIV care facilities, especially Isoniazid, and to more people irrespective of ART use. Coordinating local BCP suppliers could help improve availability through addressing logistical challenges or reducing costs.
    AIDS Care 02/2014; · 1.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient-reported outcome validation needs to achieve validity and reliability standards. Among reliability analysis parameters, test-retest reliability is an important psychometric property. Retested patients must be in a clinically stable condition. This is particularly problematic in palliative care (PC) settings because advanced cancer patients are prone to a faster rate of clinical deterioration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the methods by which multi-symptom and health-related qualities of life (HRQoL) based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been validated in oncological PC settings with regards to test-retest reliability. A systematic search of PubMed (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), PsychInfo (1806 to June 2013), CINAHL (1980 to June 2013), and SCIELO (1998 to June 2013), and specific PRO databases was performed. Studies were included if they described a set of validation studies. Studies were included if they described a set of validation studies for an instrument developed to measure multi-symptom or multidimensional HRQoL in advanced cancer patients under PC. The COSMIN checklist was used to rate the methodological quality of the study designs. We identified 89 validation studies from 746 potentially relevant articles. From those 89 articles, 31 measured test-retest reliability and were included in this review. Upon critical analysis of the overall quality of the criteria used to determine the test-retest reliability, 6 (19.4%), 17 (54.8%), and 8 (25.8%) of these articles were rated as good, fair, or poor, respectively, and no article was classified as excellent. Multi-symptom instruments were retested over a shortened interval when compared to the HRQoL instruments (median values 24 hours and 168 hours, respectively; p = 0.001). Validation studies that included objective confirmation of clinical stability in their design yielded better results for the test-retest analysis with regard to both pain and global HRQoL scores (p < 0.05). The quality of the statistical analysis and its description were of great concern. Test-retest reliability has been infrequently and poorly evaluated. The confirmation of clinical stability was an important factor in our analysis, and we suggest that special attention be focused on clinical stability when designing a PRO validation study that includes advanced cancer patients under PC.
    BMC Medical Research Methodology 01/2014; 14(1):8. · 2.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although sub-Saharan Africa suffers the greatest burden of progressive illness, there are few outcome measures with adequate properties to measure needs and outcomes. To examine the psychometric properties of the FACIT-Pal among people receiving palliative care in three African countries. Adult patients in South Africa, Kenya and Uganda gave self-report data to the core FACIT-G plus Pal subscale. Data were subjected to 1) Factor analysis, 2) corrected item-total correlations and 3) Cronbach's alpha for full scale and subscales. The resulting four factors bear a strong similarity to the original FACT-G in our sample of 461: physical symptoms, functional wellbeing, friends and family, and emotional well-being. Cronbach's α for the full 27-item scale was 0.90 and for the Physical Well-Being, Social/Family Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being and Functional Well-Being subscales it was 0.83, 0.78, 0.80 and 0.87 respectively. Varimax rotation of the 19 item FACIT-Pal scale showed three clear, interpretable factors. Factor 1 a sense of purpose and meaning in life, Factor 2 physical symptoms, and Factor 3 social integration. For the 19 item FACIT- Pal, Cronbach's α was 0.81 and individual corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.24 - 0.61. Cronbach's α for the eight items comprising Factor 1 (Meaning in Life) was 0.83. For the other two factors it was 0.70 (Physical Symptoms, 6 items) and 0.68 (Social Integration, 3 items). The FACT-Pal is a reliable multidimensional scale for people with life-limiting, incurable diseases in sub-Saharan Africa, and the observed factors are interpretable and clinically meaningful.
    Journal of pain and symptom management 04/2014; · 2.42 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

View
21 Downloads
Available from
May 30, 2014