암 환자에 대한 한국어판 FACIT-호흡곤란 10개 항목 단축형 설문지의 신뢰도와 타당도 분석

Background: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) for Dyspnea was developed to assess multidimensional dyspnea using two subscales (experience of dyspnea and functional limitation) and a total score. Objects: This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Korea...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Han'guk Chŏnmun Mulli Ch'iryo Hakhoe chi = Journal of the Korean Academy of University Trained Physical Therapists 2020, 27(2), , pp.111-117
Hauptverfasser: 구본일, Bon-il Ku, 오덕원, Duck-won Oh, 이민지, Min-ji Lee, 김성경, Seong-kyeong Kim
Format: Artikel
Sprache:kor
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) for Dyspnea was developed to assess multidimensional dyspnea using two subscales (experience of dyspnea and functional limitation) and a total score. Objects: This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the FACIT-dyspnea 10-item short form questionnaire (FACIT-dyspnea-K). Methods: Subjects were 163 patients with cancer. Dyspnea-related scales (modified Medical Research Council scale [mMRC], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 [EORTC QLQ-C30], Hospital Anxiety and Depression [HAD], and WHO Performance Scale) were used to validate the FACIT-dyspnea-K. Results: Internal consistency was confirmed by Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.90 and 0.95 in factors 1 and 2, respectively. Convergence validity was determined by comparing the two factors and total score of the FACIT-dyspnea-K with conceptually related assessment tools measuring the physical and emotional effects of dyspnea, with which correlations ranged from 0.364 to 0.567. Criterion validity was established by significant differences in the FACITdyspnea- K score between groups when the patients were classified by performance status as assessed by the WHO performance scale. Furthermore, the FACIT-dyspnea-K showed notable correlations with other dyspnea scales (mMRC, EORTC QLQ-C30, and HAD) for cancer patients (r = 0.28 to 0.54). The test-retest reliability of the two factors and total score of the FACITdyspnea- K appeared to be excellent (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.96 to 0.97). Conclusion: This study supports FACIT-dyspnea-K as a valid and reliable instrument to assess the dyspnea experience of cancer patients in clinical settings.
ISSN:1225-8962
2287-982X
DOI:10.12674/ptk.2020.27.2.111