Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with breast cancer: a systematic and standardized comparison of available instruments using the EMPRO tool

Abstract

The FACT-B scored the highest on overall on our EMPRO evaluation of instruments measuring health-related quality of life among breast cancer patients. However, depending on the purpose of the study, several instruments (EORTC BR-23, IBCSG, SF-36, and WHO-QOL BREF) have shown good performance in some of the specific individual dimensions included in the EMPRO.

Physical activity‐related quality of life in breast cancer survivors compared to healthy women

“…Physical activity improves quality of life in healthy women (Chin, van Poppel, Twisk, & van Mechelen, ; Rezende Barbosa et al, ) and can also improve quality of life in breast cancer survivors (Duijts, Faber, Oldenburg, van Beurden, & Aaronson, ; Fong et al, ; Lahart, Metsios, Nevill, & Carmichael, ; Mishra et al, ). However, in breast cancer survivors, quality of life is most often measured with general or disease‐specific quality of life tools that are not directly related to physical activity (Chopra & Kamal, ; Maratia, Cedillo, & Rejas, ; Pusic et al, ), and so may not accurately reflect physical activity‐related quality of life (PAQOL). Given the almost universal benefits of physical activity, it seems possible that if quality of life were measured with a tool specific to PAQOL, appreciable differences might not be found between breast cancer survivors and healthy women with similar activity levels.…”

“…The Vitality Plus Scale (VPS) measures exercise-related health benefits in middle-aged and older adults (Myers et al, 1999). It has been validated against the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) (McHorney, Ware, & Raczek, 1993;Ware & Sherbourne, 1992), a general health-related quality of life instrument that has been frequently used to assess quality of life among breast cancer survivors (Maratia et al, 2016;Pusic et al, 2013). The VPS was initially developed and validated using a pool of more than 600 men and women ranging in age from 40 to 94 years, and has subsequently been used to assess exercise-related quality of life in community-dwelling middle-aged (mean age 59.2 years) and older (mean age 71.0 years) men and women (de Jong et al, 2006;Stiggelbout, Popkema, Hopman-Rock, de Greef, & van Mechelen, 2004), functionally impaired older (mean age 80.8 years) men and women (Burton, Lewin, Celmson, & Boldy, 2014), frail older (mean age 82.0 years) men and women (Johnson, Myers, Scholey, Cyarto, & Ecclestone, 2003), older (mean age 81.7 years) men and women in long-term care (Chin et al, 2004) and older (mean age 68.7 years) men and women with Parkinson's disease .…”

Propriedades Psicométricas De Instrumentos De Medidas: Bases Conceituais E Métodos De Avaliação - Parte I

“…6,8 The adaptationof instruments for the evaluation of subjective constructs,for different languages and cultures, has also been the subject of a large number of investigations, including discussions on the appropriate methodological process to ensure that the instrument preserves its properties of validity and reliability after adaptation. 1 In the last decade, this type of research has produced a considerable number of nursing researches, [9][10][11][12][13] reflecting the concern of these professionals to identify the most appropriate measurement instrument for a given situation or condition, considering the one that addresses the monitoring of patients in clinical practice and that contemplates the perception of the individuals themselves in the evaluation of their state of health. 14 From the analysis of the increase in measurement instruments available in the scientific literature, the authors identified two important aspects to be overcome: the need to identify the available questionnaires for a specific use in the various subjects, so that they may be known to interested professionals and the need to know the measures that would be considered more appropriate (valid and reliable) among the various available instruments.…”

“…Reference values in the literature are identified to evaluate the properties of measurement, 1,3,7,13,[18][19] among which are highlighted in the present study: Consensus-based Standards for these statistics of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN), which deals with consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments and the Evaluation of the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO), which includes concepts for the evaluation of instruments for assessing patientreported outcomes. 13,18 Both were proposed in order to contribute to the identification of measurement instruments in health, whose properties presented consistent data, besides proposing a consensus on the measurement properties of instruments that incorporate the perspective of the patient -PatientReported Outcome (PRO).…”

“…13,18 Both were proposed in order to contribute to the identification of measurement instruments in health, whose properties presented consistent data, besides proposing a consensus on the measurement properties of instruments that incorporate the perspective of the patient -PatientReported Outcome (PRO).…”