Kenneth Mah1, Sophie Lebel2, Jonathan Irish3,4,5, Andrea Bezjak4,5,6, Ada Y M Payne7, Gerald M Devins8,5,9. 1. Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (University Health Network), Toronto, Ontario, Canada. kmah@uhnresearch.ca. 2. School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (University Health Network), Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Ontario Cancer Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (University Health Network), Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 7. Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 8. Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (University Health Network), Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 9. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This cross-sectional study presents an initial psychometric evaluation of a two-dimensional (perceptual and evaluative) conceptualization and measure of disrupted body integrity (DBI)-illness-related disruption of the sense of the body as an integrated, smoothly functioning whole. METHODS: Male and female head and neck cancer (HNC) outpatients (N = 98) completed a questionnaire package prior to outpatient visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Disrupted Body Integrity Scale (DBIS) was developed to measure the perceptual and evaluative facets of DBI. Self-report measures of disfigurement, stigma, depressive symptoms, and negative affect were also completed. RESULTS: Almost all DBIS subscales demonstrated good internal consistency. Results largely supported the DBIS's construct validity. The majority of subscales correlated within the predicted range of r's = .40-.70. Almost all DBIS constructs were positively linked with either depressive symptoms or disfigurement. None correlated with positive affect, and only two subscales, abnormal sensations (perceptual) and physical vulnerability (evaluative), correlated with negative affect. DBIS constructs showed little relation with stigma, once disfigurement effects were controlled for. CONCLUSIONS: Findings offer preliminary evidence for the DBIS and the relevance of DBI in HNC. Further evaluation of DBI in disease adaptation and the DBIS's factor structure is warranted.
PURPOSE: This cross-sectional study presents an initial psychometric evaluation of a two-dimensional (perceptual and evaluative) conceptualization and measure of disrupted body integrity (DBI)-illness-related disruption of the sense of the body as an integrated, smoothly functioning whole. METHODS: Male and female head and neck cancer (HNC) outpatients (N = 98) completed a questionnaire package prior to outpatient visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Disrupted Body Integrity Scale (DBIS) was developed to measure the perceptual and evaluative facets of DBI. Self-report measures of disfigurement, stigma, depressive symptoms, and negative affect were also completed. RESULTS: Almost all DBIS subscales demonstrated good internal consistency. Results largely supported the DBIS's construct validity. The majority of subscales correlated within the predicted range of r's = .40-.70. Almost all DBIS constructs were positively linked with either depressive symptoms or disfigurement. None correlated with positive affect, and only two subscales, abnormal sensations (perceptual) and physical vulnerability (evaluative), correlated with negative affect. DBIS constructs showed little relation with stigma, once disfigurement effects were controlled for. CONCLUSIONS: Findings offer preliminary evidence for the DBIS and the relevance of DBI in HNC. Further evaluation of DBI in disease adaptation and the DBIS's factor structure is warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adaptation; Body experience; Embodiment; Head and neck cancer; Psychometric evaluation
Authors: M G Weiss; D R Doongaji; S Siddhartha; D Wypij; S Pathare; M Bhatawdekar; A Bhave; A Sheth; R Fernandes Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 1992-06 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: C S Carver; C Pozo-Kaderman; A A Price; V Noriega; S D Harris; R P Derhagopian; D S Robinson; F L Moffat Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 1998 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.312