The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General FACT-G Scale Reliability and Validity of a Turkish Version

Abstract

Objective: Many of the cancer-specific quality of life (QOL) questionnaires improved over the last 20 years, can be contemplated as reference measures. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) system is an based and generic health-related quality of life measures. The aim of this study was conducted to test the reliability and construct validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) for Turkish cancer patients. Material and Methods: This research is a methodological study. The data were obtained by using the sociodemographic and the FACT-G questionnaire. The sample comprised 148 cancer pa¬tients. Data were analysed by using the SPSS package program, descriptive statistics and to assess the reliability of the scales, cronbach alpha coefficient, item total score analysis, and, item total correlation coefficient (Pearson's correlation). For the construct validity of the instrument; exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used. Results: The mean total score of FACT-G was 60.71±14.42, and for the physical, social/ family, emotional and functional well-being subscales 15.83±5.48, 13.91±4.90, 13.45±5.03 and 17.51± 5.04, respectively. The alpha coefficient was 0.88 for the global scale of the FACT-G questionnaire and ranged from 0.70 to 0.79 across subscales. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between FACT-G and test-retest scores of the four sub-dimensions (p=0.001). Conclusion: In this study, as a result of evaluating the psychometric properties of the FACT-G scale, the scale is a valid and reliable tool for use in Turkish patients with cancer.

Keywords

• Cancer
• Quality of life
• The functional assessment of cancer therapy general scale (FACT-G)
• Validity
• Reliability

Project Number

Yok

Kanser Tedavisinin İşlevsel Değerlendirmesi Ölçeği FACT-G Türkçe Versiyonunun Geçerlik ve Güvenilirliği

Abstract

Giriş ve Amaç: Son 20 yılda geliştirilen kansere özgü yaşam kalitesi (QOL) anketlerinin çoğu, referans önlemler olarak düşünülebilir. Kronik Hastalık Tedavisinin İşlevsel Değerlendirmesi (FACIT) sistemi, temelli ve genel sağlıkla ilgili yaşam kalitesi ölçümleridir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G)'nin Türk kanser hastaları için güvenilirliğini ve geçerliliğini test etmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu araştırma metodolojik tiptedir. Veriler, sosyodemografik ve FACT-G anketi kullanılarak elde edildi. Örneklem 148 kanser hastasını içermektedir. Veriler, SPSS paket programı kullanılarak tanımlayıcı istatistikler ve ölçeklerin güvenirliğini saptamada, cronbach alfa katsayısı ve madde toplam korelasyon katsayısı (Pearson korelasyon) ile değerlendirildi. Enstrümanın geçerliliği için; açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi kullanıldı. Bulgular: Kanser Tedavisinin İşlevsel Değerlendirmesi Ölçeği toplam puanı 60.71±14.42 iken, fiziksel, sosyal/ aile, duygusal ve fonksiyonel iyilik alt ölçeklerinin puan ortalamaları ise sırasıyla; 15.83±5.48, 13.91±4.90, 13.45±5.03, 17.51±5.04 olarak bulundu. Ölçeğin iç tutarlılığını belirlemek için kullanılan cronbach alfa katsayısı toplam ölçek için 0.88 olarak, alt ölçeklerde ise 0.70 ile 0.79 arasında bulundu. FACT-G ve dört alt boyutunun puanları arasında istatistiksel olarak pozitif yönde korelasyon ve anlamlı bir ilişki olduğu saptandı (p=0.001). Sonuç: Bu araştırmada FACT-G ölçeğinin psikometrik özelliklerinin değerlendirmesi sonucunda, ölçeğin Türkiye’deki kanser tanılı hastalarda kullanımı için geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç olduğu belirlendi.

Keywords

• Kanser
• Yaşam kalitesi
• Kanser tedavisinin işlevsel değerlendirme ölçeği (FACT-G)
• Geçerlilik
• Güvenilirlik

Supporting Institution

Yok

Project Number

Yok

Thanks

Yok

References

1. 6.References 1. World Health Organization (WHO). Available at http://www.who.int/cancer/en/ (accessed 09.01. 2020) 2. Orley J, Kuyken W. Quality of Life Assessment: International Perspectives. Proceedings of The Joint meeting Organized by the WHO and the Foundation IPSEN in Paris; 1993, pp 41-57. 3. Cella D, Stone AA. Health-related quality of life measurement in oncology: advances and opportunities. American Psychologist, 2015, 70:175-185. 4. Marcel WM. Definitions of quality of life: what has happened and how to move on. Top Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Summer, 2014, 20 (3): 167-180. 5. Cella DF, Bonomi AE, Lloyd SR, Tulsky DS, Kaplan E, Bonomi. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) quality of life instrument. Lung Cancer, 1995, 12: 199-220. 6. Hunt SM, Alonso J, Bucquet D, Niero M, Wiklund, I, McKenna S. European group for Health Measurement and Quality of Life Assessment: Cross-cultural adaptation of health measures. Health Policy, 1991, 19:33-44. 7. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, de Haes JC, et al.The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1993, Mar 3;85(5):365-76. 8. www.eortc.org. Available from: http://groups.eortc.be/qol/eortc-qlq-c30 (accessed 10.01.2020). 9. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi, A, Silberman M, Yellen SB, Winicour P, Brannon J. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale: development and validation of the general measure. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1993, 11:570-79. 10. Brady MJ, Cella DF, Mo F, Bonomi AE, Tulsky DS, Lloyd SR, Deasy S, Cobleigh M, Shiomoto G. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) quality of life instrument. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1997, 15(3):974-86. 11. Webster K, Cella D, Kost K. The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy (FACIT) measurement system: properties, applications, and interpretation. Health Quality Life Outcomes, 2003, 1:1-7. 12. Costet N, Lapierre V, Benhamou E, Le, Galès C. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) in French cancer patients. Quality of Life Research, 2005, Jun;14 (5):1427-32. 13. Lyons KD, Bakitas M, Hegel MT, Hanscom B, Hull J, Ahles TA. Reliability and Validity of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy- Palliative Care (FACIT-Pal) Scale. J Pain Symptom Manage, 2009, January, 37:1. 14. Winstead-Fry P, Schultz A. Psychometric Analysis of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Scale in a rural sample. Cancer, 1997, 79: 2446-52. 15. Smith AB, Wright P, Selby PJ, Velikova GA. Rasch and factor analysis of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). Health Quality Life Outcomes, 2007, 5:19. 16. Sánchez R, Ballesteros M, Arnold BJ (2011). Validation of the FACT-G scale for evaluating quality of life in cancer patients in Colombia. Quality of Life Research, Feb; 20 (1):19-29. 17. Dapueto JJ, Francolino C, Servente L. Chang CH, Gotta I, Levin R, Abreu Mdel C. Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Spanish Version 4 in South America: Classic psychometric and item response theory analyses. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 2003, 1:32. 18. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language: Scientific Software International; 4th ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Chicago, IL, US, 1998. 19. Şimşek, ÖF. Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling-Basic Principles and LISREL Applications, Turkey, Ekinoks Press, 2007, Ankara. 20. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness of fit measures. MPR Online, 2003, 8: (2) 23-74. Available from:http://www.mpr-online.de (accessed 10.02.2020). 21. Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. 24th edition. Pegem Akademi Publishers. Ankara, 2008, pp 179-193. 22. Santos JRA. Cronbach's alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. The Journal of Extension, 1999, ,37:(2). 23. Gözüm S, Aksayan S. A guide for transcultural adaptation of the scale II:psychometric characteristics and crosscultural comparison. HEMAR-G, 2003, 5(1): 3-14. 24. http://www.facit.org (accessed 25.05. 2017). 25. Winstead-Fry P, Schultz A. Psychometric Analysis of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Scale in a Rural Sample. Cancer, 1997, 79:2446-52.