Back to Search Start Over

Electronic versus paper-pencil methods for assessing chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy.

Authors :
Knoerl, Robert
Gray, Evan
Stricker, Carrie
Mitchell, Sandra A
Kippe, Kelsey
Smith, Gloria
Dudley, William N
Lavoie Smith, Ellen M
Source :
Supportive Care in Cancer. Jun2017 Supplement, Vol. 25, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Publication Year :
2017

Abstract

<bold>Purpose: </bold>The aim of this study is to examine and compare with the validated, paper/pencil European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Scale (QLQ-CIPN20), the psychometric properties of three electronically administered patient reported outcome (PRO) measures of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN): (1) the two neuropathy items from the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), (2) the QLQ-CIPN20, and (3) the 0-10 Neuropathy Screening Question (NSQ).<bold>Methods: </bold>We employed a descriptive, cross-sectional design and recruited 25 women with breast cancer who were receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy at an academic hospital. Participants completed the paper/pencil QLQ-CIPN20 and electronic versions of the QLQ-CIPN20, PRO-CTCAE, and NSQ. Internal consistency reliability, intraclass correlation, and concurrent and discriminant validity analyses were conducted.<bold>Results: </bold>The alpha coefficients for the electronic QLQ-CIPN20 sensory and motor subscales were 0.76 and 0.75. Comparison of the electronic and paper/pencil QLQ-CIPN20 subscales supported mode equivalence (intraclass correlation range >0.91). Participants who reported the presence of numbness/tingling via the single-item NSQ reported higher mean QLQ-CIPN20 sensory subscale scores (p < 0.001). PRO-CTCAE neuropathy severity and interference items correlated well with the QLQ-CIPN20 electronic and paper/pencil sensory (r = 0.76; r = 0.70) and motor (r = 0.55; r = 0.62) subscales, and with the NSQ (r = 0.72; r = 0.44).<bold>Conclusion: </bold>These data support the validity of the electronically administered PRO-CTCAE neuropathy items, NSQ, and QLQ-CIPN20 for neuropathy screening in clinical practice. The electronic and paper/pencil versions of the QLQ-CIPN can be used interchangeably based on evidence of mode equivalence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
09414355
Volume :
25
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Supportive Care in Cancer
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
123398945
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3764-y