Samantha J Anthony1,2, Enid Selkirk3, Lillian Sung4, Robert J Klaassen5, David Dix6, Anne F Klassen3. 1. Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. samantha.anthony@sickkids.ca. 2. Division of Haematology/Oncology, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay Street - 6.9710, Toronto, ON, M5G 0A4, Canada. samantha.anthony@sickkids.ca. 3. Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 4. Division of Haematology/Oncology, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, 686 Bay Street - 6.9710, Toronto, ON, M5G 0A4, Canada. 5. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 6. Department of Pediatrics Hem/Onc/BMT, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The assessment of quality of life (QOL) is key within pediatric oncology and requires a clearly defined construct of QOL. The purpose of our study was: (1) to conduct a qualitative study to inform the theoretical underpinnings of QOL and (2) to determine the appropriateness of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to assess and evaluate QOL in pediatric cancer patients and survivors. METHODS: The study used an interpretative description approach. Children diagnosed with childhood cancer, aged 8-18 years, were recruited from four Canadian hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were completed, transcribed verbatim and coded through methods of constant comparison. In-depth analysis facilitated a comparison between emerging themes and the content of commonly used PRO instruments. RESULTS: Thirty-seven children (19 females; 51 %) participated. The mean age was 13 years, and 19 (51 %) participants were post-treatment. Participant experiences reflected notions of positive and negative duality, including: maintaining physical functioning but longing for the ability to participate in activities; experiencing a new level of intimacy with family and friends amidst isolation; and developing positivity amidst anger, sadness and lingering worry. Analysis showed that existing PRO instruments are missing concerns specific to this population and contain content not reflective of the QOL experiences of childhood cancer patients and survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Our research highlights important problems with content validity of existing PRO scales, indicating that the tools we have to date have limited utility in research and clinical practice. The development of a new PRO instrument should be considered to ensure that content validity is achieved.
PURPOSE: The assessment of quality of life (QOL) is key within pediatric oncology and requires a clearly defined construct of QOL. The purpose of our study was: (1) to conduct a qualitative study to inform the theoretical underpinnings of QOL and (2) to determine the appropriateness of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to assess and evaluate QOL in pediatric cancerpatients and survivors. METHODS: The study used an interpretative description approach. Children diagnosed with childhood cancer, aged 8-18 years, were recruited from four Canadian hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were completed, transcribed verbatim and coded through methods of constant comparison. In-depth analysis facilitated a comparison between emerging themes and the content of commonly used PRO instruments. RESULTS: Thirty-seven children (19 females; 51 %) participated. The mean age was 13 years, and 19 (51 %) participants were post-treatment. Participant experiences reflected notions of positive and negative duality, including: maintaining physical functioning but longing for the ability to participate in activities; experiencing a new level of intimacy with family and friends amidst isolation; and developing positivity amidst anger, sadness and lingering worry. Analysis showed that existing PRO instruments are missing concerns specific to this population and contain content not reflective of the QOL experiences of childhood cancerpatients and survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Our research highlights important problems with content validity of existing PRO scales, indicating that the tools we have to date have limited utility in research and clinical practice. The development of a new PRO instrument should be considered to ensure that content validity is achieved.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Patient outcome assessment; Pediatrics; Quality of life
Authors: Donald L Patrick; Laurie B Burke; Chad J Gwaltney; Nancy Kline Leidy; Mona L Martin; Elizabeth Molsen; Lena Ring Journal: Value Health Date: 2011-10-10 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Elizabeth Waters; Elise Davis; Gabriel M Ronen; Peter Rosenbaum; Michael Livingston; Saroj Saigal Journal: Dev Med Child Neurol Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 5.449
Authors: Chandylen L Nightingale; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Barbara A Curbow; Bradley J Zebrack; Kevin R Krull; I-Chan Huang Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Anne F Klassen; Samantha J Anthony; Aalia Khan; Lillian Sung; Robert Klaassen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-05-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Kathryn Eilene Lasch; Patrick Marquis; Marc Vigneux; Linda Abetz; Benoit Arnould; Martha Bayliss; Bruce Crawford; Kathleen Rosa Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-05-30 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Martin Kaj Fridh Nielsen; Jesper Frank Christensen; Thomas Leth Frandsen; Troels Thorsteinsson; Lars Bo Andersen; Karl Bang Christensen; Peder Skov Wehner; Henrik Hasle; Lis Ørgaard Adamsen; Kjeld Schmiegelow; Hanne Bækgaard Larsen Journal: BMC Med Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Maria Rothmund; Samantha Sodergren; Gudrun Rohde; Teresa de Rojas; Gloria Paratico; Giorgia Albini; Johanna Mur; Anne-Sophie Darlington; Alessandra Majorana; David Riedl Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-09-24 Impact factor: 3.440