Search

Advances in cancer care delivery require revision and further development of questionnaires assessing patients’ perceived quality of care. This study pre‐tested the revised EORTC satisfaction with cancer care core questionnaire applicable in both the cancer inpatient and outpatient settings, and its new, outpatient‐specific complementary module. The process of revision, development of the extended application, and pre‐testing of these questionnaires was based on phases I to III of the “EORTC Quality of Life Group Module Development Guidelines.” In phase III, patients in 11 countries in four European regions, South America and Asia completed provisional versions of the questionnaires. Fifty‐seven relevant issues selected from literature reviews and input from experts were operationalized into provisional items, and subsequently translated into ten languages. Assessment of understanding, acceptability, redundancy and relevance by patients (n = 151) from oncology inpatient wards, and outpatient chemotherapy, radiotherapy and consultation settings, led to retention of, deletion of and merging of 40, 14 and 6 items respectively. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for hypothesized questionnaire scales were above 0.80. Our results provide preliminary support for the 33‐item EORTC Satisfaction with cancer care core questionnaire and the 7‐item complementary module specific for the outpatient care setting. A large scale phase IV cross‐cultural psychometric study is now underway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 15 Palliative (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL) was developed to assess quality of life (QOL) for the palliative cancer population to decrease patient burden. The purpose of this study was to compare predictive factors for well-being in the QLQ-C15-PAL extracted from the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 (QLQ-C30) with the QLQ-C30 itself., Methods and Materials: Patients with advanced cancer referred for treatment of bone metastases completed the QLQ-C30. Fifteen items from the QLQ-C15-PAL were extracted from the QLQ-C30. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine predictive factors of the global QOL/health score in both tools. In the multivariate analyses, a p value of <0.003 indicated statistical significance., Results: Overall, predictive factors were similar when analyzing data from both tools. Predictive factors for the QLQ-C30 were role functioning (p<0.0001), fatigue (p<0.0001), nausea/vomiting (p<0.0001), and financial problems (p<0.0001) and factors for the extracted QLQ-C15-PAL were physical functioning (p<0.0001) and fatigue (p<0.0001)., Conclusions: Extraction of the QLQ-C15-PAL items from the QLQ-C30 resulted in similar predictive QOL domains for all patient subgroups analyzed individually. The QLQ-C15-PAL is reflective of the QLQ-C30 domains and is recommended for future studies involving patients in a palliative setting, as this shorter questionnaire reduces patient burden and may increase accrual and compliance, while maintaining a similar breadth of coverage and achieving the same predictive ability.