Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.6348 on March 2 2009

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Teno, J. M. Articles by Lyons, K. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Teno, J. M. Articles by Lyons, K. D. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Cancer Patient Assessment and Reports of Excellence: Reliability and Validity of Advanced Cancer Patient Perceptions of the Quality of Care

From the Center for Gerontology and Health Care Research, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, RI; and the Department of Psychiatry, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH.

Corresponding author: Joan M. Teno, MD, MS, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Center for Gerontology and Health Care Research, 121 South Main St, Box G-121-612, Providence, RI 02912; e-mail: joan_teno{at}brown.edu.

Purpose Consumer perceptions are important measures of the quality of cancer care. This article describes the validation of new measures of the quality of cancer care at the time of diagnosis and treatment for advanced cancer with life-limiting prognosis.

Methods Focus groups, review of guidelines, and an expert panel were used to construct two surveys of the quality of cancer care. A prospective cohort study examined the reliability and validity of three problem scores (ie, counts of the opportunities to improve the quality of care) that examine care at the time of diagnosis and initial treatment.

Results At the first interview, 58% of 206 cancer patients (54.9% females; 27.5% with lung cancer; 5.4% with pancreatic cancer; 30.4% with colorectal cancer; 18.6% with breast cancer; mean age, 66.6 years) identified one or more concerns with communication about being diagnosed with advanced cancer. At the second interview, 57.0% of the respondents voiced one or more concerns about treatment communication, and 30.2% expressed one or more concerns about the experience of treatment. Each of the problem scores demonstrated both internal consistency with Cronbach's > .75 and short-term stability of responses in a subsample that had the survey administered twice in 72 hours. Factor analysis largely confirmed the proposed scale structure. All three measures demonstrated moderate correlations suggesting evidence of construct validity.

Conclusion The three proposed problem scores demonstrate evidence of reliability and validity that warrants further testing to examine their responsiveness and discriminate validity in larger, more generalizable samples.

Supported by National Cancer Institute Grant No. CA097358 R01.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

The Acknowledgment is included in the full-text version of this article, available online at www.jco.org. It is not included in the PDF version (via Adobe® Reader®).

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?