Chinese version of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory: validation and application of symptom measurement in cancer patients.

Division of Internal Medicine, Department of Symptom Research, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
Cancer (Impact Factor: 4.9). 11/2004; 101(8):1890-901. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20448
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Symptom management is an essential component of cancer treatment for patients of every culture and nationality. Symptom assessment depends on subjective reporting, mandating linguistically equivalent versions of symptom assessment scales. Because disease-related and treatment-related symptoms most often occur in clusters, there is a global need for a standardized multiple-symptom assessment tool.
The authors sought to validate the Chinese version of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-C) by enrolling patients who had received various diagnoses of and different types of treatment for cancer (n = 249) in a cross-sectional symptom study conducted at an urban cancer center in China.
Factor analysis identified 2 underlying constructs, general symptoms and gastrointestinal symptoms, which had Cronbach alpha coefficients of 0.86 and 0.84, respectively. These results were consistent with English- and Japanese-language MDASI validation studies. Known-group validity was supported by the MDASI-C's ability to detect significant differences in symptom and interference levels according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS; P < 0.001) and chemotherapy status (P < 0.05). Fifty-five percent of the study cohort had > or = 1 symptom that was considered severe (score > or = 7 on a 0-10 scale). ECOG PS was strongly associated with symptom burden (total interference score: R(2) = 0.26; P < 0.001). Fatigue, sadness, drowsiness, and lack of appetite accounted for most of the variability in the total interference score (R(2) = 0.49; P < 0.05).
The authors demonstrated that the MDASI-C is a valid, reliable, and concise tool for measuring symptom severity and interference with functioning in Chinese cancer patients.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To explore the influence of self-efficacy and demographic, disease-related, and psychological factors on symptom distress among Chinese colorectal cancer patients receiving postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods Two-hundred and fifty-two colorectal cancer patients who had undergone postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy completed Chinese versions of M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-GI), Stanford Inventory of Cancer Patient Adjustment (SICPA), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Associations between patients' self-efficacy and demographic, disease-related, psychological factors and symptom distress were examined. Results Patients' overall symptom distress level was mild; MDASI median subscale scores showed mild symptom severity and symptom interference. Anxiety and depression were positively associated with symptom distress. Multivariable analysis showed that more severe symptoms were associated with age ≥60 years, female gender, suburban residence, body mass index <18.5, and stage III cancer. Age ≥60 years, female gender, marital status of single or divorced, and suburban residence were associated with greater symptom interference with daily activities. Greater self-efficacy was associated with milder symptoms severity and less symptom interference with daily life. After adjusting for confounders, patients with higher SICPA scores had less symptom distress. Conclusions Self-efficacy is strongly associated with reduced symptom severity and symptom interference with daily life in CRC patients. Symptom severity is associated with age >60 years, female gender, body mass index <18.5, suburban residence and stage III disease. Nurse-administered self-efficacy interventions may help to improve self-efficacy and reduce symptom distress.
    European Journal of Oncology Nursing 09/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.ejon.2014.08.002 · 1.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Colorectal cancer is a major public health problem. There is growing support for colorectal cancer survivors who are experiencing problems after cancer treatment to engage in self-management programs to reduce symptom distress. However, there is inconclusive evidence as to the effectiveness of such program especially in Asian region. Objectives This study tested the effects of a six-month nurse-led self-efficacy-enhancing intervention for patients with colorectal cancer, compared with routine care over a six-month follow up. Design A randomized controlled trial with repeated measures, two-group design. Setting Three teaching hospitals in Guangzhou, China. Participants: One hundred and fifty-two Chinese adult patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer were recruited. The intervention group (n = 76) received self-efficacy-enhancing intervention and the control group (n = 76) received standard care. Method The participants were randomized into either intervention or control group after baseline measures. The outcomes of the study (self-efficacy, symptom distress, anxiety, depression and quality of life) were compared at baseline, three and six months after the intervention. Results Sixty-eight participants in the intervention group and 53 in the control group completed the study. Their mean age was 53 (SD = 11.3). Repeated measure MANOVA found that the patients in the intervention group had significant improvement in their self-efficacy (F = 7.26, p = 0.003) and a reduction of symptom severity (F = 5.30, p = 0.01), symptom interference (F = 4.06, p = 0.025), anxiety (F = 6.04, p = 0.006) and depression (F = 6.96, p = 0.003) at three and six months, compared with the control group. However, no statistically significant main effect was observed in quality of life perception between the two groups. Conclusions The nurse-led self-efficacy enhancing intervention was effective in promoting self-efficacy and psychological well-being in patients with colorectal cancer, compared with standard care. The intervention can be incorporated into routine care. Future empirical work is required to determine the longer term effects of the intervention.
    International journal of nursing studies 01/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.12.005 · 2.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Researchers focused on patient-centered medicine are increasingly trying to identify baseline factors that predict treatment success. Because the quantity and function of lymphocyte subsets change during stress, we hypothesized that these subsets would serve as stress markers and therefore predict which breast cancer patients would benefit most from mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR)-facilitated stress relief. The purpose of this study was to assess whether baseline biomarker levels predicted symptom improvement following an MBSR intervention for breast cancer survivors (MBSR[BC]). This randomized controlled trial involved 41 patients assigned to either an MBSR(BC) intervention group or a no-treatment control group. Biomarkers were assessed at baseline, and symptom change was assessed 6 weeks later. Biomarkers included common lymphocyte subsets in the peripheral blood as well as the ability of T cells to become activated and secrete cytokines in response to stimulation with mitogens. Spearman correlations were used to identify univariate relationships between baseline biomarkers and 6-week improvement of symptoms. Next, backward elimination regression models were used to identify the strongest predictors from the univariate analyses. Multiple baseline biomarkers were significantly positively related to 6-week symptom improvement. The regression models identified B-lymphocytes and interferon-γ as the strongest predictors of gastrointestinal improvement (p < .01), +CD4+CD8 as the strongest predictor of cognitive/psychological (CP) improvement (p = .02), and lymphocytes and interleukin (IL)-4 as the strongest predictors of fatigue improvement (p < .01). These results provide preliminary evidence of the potential to use baseline biomarkers as predictors to identify the patients likely to benefit from this intervention.
    Biological Research for Nursing 01/2014; 16(4). DOI:10.1177/1099800413519494 · 1.34 Impact Factor