TY - JOUR
T1 - A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores
AU - Yount, Susan
AU - List, Marcy
AU - Du, Hongyan
AU - Yost, Kathleen
AU - Bode, Rita
AU - Brockstein, Bruce
AU - Argiris, Athanassios
AU - Vokes, Everett
AU - Cohen, Ezra E.W.
AU - Campbell, Bruce
AU - Valenzuela, Veronica
AU - George, Jacquelyn
AU - Egan, Robyn
AU - Chen, Jessica
AU - Meddis, David
AU - Cella, David
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgment This study was supported by an unrestricted grant from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals.
PY - 2007/12
Y1 - 2007/12
N2 - Objective: To evaluate the impact of administration context (embedded versus stand-alone) on the reliability and validity of the FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index (FHNSI). Methods: Ninety-eight patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to one of two assessment conditions to evaluate the FHNSI's context (items administered embedded within the FACT-H&N or as stand-alone scale) and order of administration in the battery. Results: Planned comparisons on the item and scale levels revealed no systematic order or context differences. The embedded and stand-alone versions of the FHNSI showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.87). Correlations were high between the FHNSI versions and the physical and functional well-being scales of the FACT-H&N (0.70-0.84) and measures of pain intensity (-0.73, -0.74) and depression (-0.71, -0.74); moderate to large with the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck subscales (PSS-HN; 0.46-0.71); and low with an anxiety measure (0.30, 0.34). Both FHNSI versions differentiated patients grouped by performance status (p < .0001, p < .0001) and global rating of change (p < .0001, p < 0.01). The FHNSI's minimally important difference range was 3-4 points. Conclusion: The FHNSI is a reliable and valid symptom index, which can be administered alone or scored using items embedded within the FACT-H&N.
AB - Objective: To evaluate the impact of administration context (embedded versus stand-alone) on the reliability and validity of the FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index (FHNSI). Methods: Ninety-eight patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to one of two assessment conditions to evaluate the FHNSI's context (items administered embedded within the FACT-H&N or as stand-alone scale) and order of administration in the battery. Results: Planned comparisons on the item and scale levels revealed no systematic order or context differences. The embedded and stand-alone versions of the FHNSI showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.87). Correlations were high between the FHNSI versions and the physical and functional well-being scales of the FACT-H&N (0.70-0.84) and measures of pain intensity (-0.73, -0.74) and depression (-0.71, -0.74); moderate to large with the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck subscales (PSS-HN; 0.46-0.71); and low with an anxiety measure (0.30, 0.34). Both FHNSI versions differentiated patients grouped by performance status (p < .0001, p < .0001) and global rating of change (p < .0001, p < 0.01). The FHNSI's minimally important difference range was 3-4 points. Conclusion: The FHNSI is a reliable and valid symptom index, which can be administered alone or scored using items embedded within the FACT-H&N.
KW - Head and neck cancer
KW - Measurement issues
KW - Signs & symptoms
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35848936727&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35848936727&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11136-007-9270-9
DO - 10.1007/s11136-007-9270-9
M3 - Article
C2 - 17922221
AN - SCOPUS:35848936727
SN - 0962-9343
VL - 16
SP - 1615
EP - 1626
JO - Quality of Life Research
JF - Quality of Life Research
IS - 10
ER -