Vol. 3 Núm. 3 (2024): simul-action for elevation
Articles

Psychometric properties of self-report instruments for assessing self-care in patients with oncological diseases: protocol for a COSMIN-based systematic review

PDF (English)
  • Carla Amato,
  • Paolo Iovino,
  • Camilla Elena Magi,
  • Yari Longobucco,
  • Khadija El Aoufy,
  • Stefano Bambi,
  • Laura Rasero
Carla Amato
Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy; Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Paolo Iovino
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Camilla Elena Magi
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Yari Longobucco
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Khadija El Aoufy
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
Stefano Bambi
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Laura Rasero
Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/if-2756

Publicado 2024-09-30

Palabras clave

  • Self-Care,
  • Self-Management,
  • Neoplasms,
  • Self-Report,
  • Psychometrics,
  • Validity,
  • Health Behaviour
    • ...Más
    Menos

Derechos de autor 2024 Carla Amato, Paolo Iovino, Camilla Elena Magi, Yari Longobucco, Khadija El Aoufy, Stefano Bambi, Laura Rasero

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.

Resumen

Background: The topic of self-care in cancer has garnered increased attention from researchers and clinicians over the years. This has prompted the development and testing of several instruments to capture the multidimensional nature of the self-care construct in cancer patients. Several self-report instruments are available in the literature; however, which instrument exhibits the best reliability and validity remains unclear.
Objective: The aim of this protocol is to identify all available instruments developed for measuring self-care behaviors in adult cancer patients and critically appraise their psychometric properties.
Methods: This systematic review will follow the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO databases will be searched for relevant articles on the topic. Studies testing the psychometric properties of self-report instruments assessing self-care behaviors in adult cancer patients, published in English, Italian, or Spanish, will be included. Two independent reviewers will assess the eligibility of the studies and extract the data. Risk of bias will be evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist, and the quality of the results will be assessed based on specific COSMIN criteria.
Conclusion: A thorough and critical evaluation of all available evidence for instruments measuring self-care in patients with cancer might have both strong clinical and research implications. The results of this review could drive healthcare providers in the selection of the most appropriate assessment tool for detecting and monitoring the self-care levels of this population. On the other hand, the results may underline the necessity of validating new instruments.

PDF (English)

Citas

  1. GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204-1222.
  2. Pituskin E. Cancer as a new chronic disease: Oncology nursing in the 21st Century. Can Oncol Nurs J Rev Can Nurs Oncol. 2022;32(1):87–92.
  3. Kang D, Kim S, Kim H, Lee M, Kong SY, Chang YJ, et al. Surveillance of Symptom Burden Using the Patient-Reported Outcome Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in Patients With Various Types of Cancers During Chemoradiation Therapy: Real-World Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 8 marzo 2023;9:e44105.
  4. Lewandowska A, Rudzki G, Lewandowski T, Próchnicki M, Rudzki S, Laskowska B, et al. Quality of Life of Cancer Patients Treated with Chemotherapy. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 23 settembre 2020;17(19):6938.
  5. Röhrl K, Guren MG, Astrup GL, Småstuen MC, Rustøen T. High symptom burden is associated with impaired quality of life in colorectal cancer patients during chemotherapy:A prospective longitudinal study. Eur J Oncol Nurs Off J Eur Oncol Nurs Soc. febbraio 2020;44:101679.
  6. Lage DE, El-Jawahri A, Fuh CX, Newcomb RA, Jackson VA, Ryan DP, et al. Functional Impairment, Symptom Burden, and Clinical Outcomes Among Hospitalized Patients With Advanced Cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN. giugno 2020;18(6):747–54.
  7. Deshields TL, Potter P, Olsen S, Liu J. The persistence of symptom burden: symptom experience and quality of life of cancer patients across one year. Support Care Cancer Off J Multinatl Assoc Support Care Cancer. aprile 2014;22(4):1089–96.
  8. Gegechkori N, Haines L, Lin JJ. Long-Term and Latent Side Effects of Specific Cancer Types. Med Clin North Am. novembre 2017;101(6):1053–73.
  9. Hasanpour-Dehkordi A. Self-care Concept Analysis in Cancer Patients: An Evolutionary Concept Analysis. Indian J Palliat Care. 2016;22(4):388–94.
  10. Abdollahi A, Alsaikhan F, Nikolenko DA, Al-Gazally ME, Mahmudiono T, Allen KA, et al. Self-care behaviors mediates the relationship between resilience and quality of life in breast cancer patients. BMC Psychiatry. 26 dicembre 2022;22(1):825.
  11. Hung HY, Wu LM, Chen KP. Determinants of Quality of Life in Lung Cancer Patients. J Nurs Scholarsh Off Publ Sigma Theta Tau Int Honor Soc Nurs. maggio 2018;50(3):257–64.
  12. Basch E, Deal AM, Dueck AC, Scher HI, Kris MG, Hudis C, et al. Overall Survival Results of a Trial Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes for Symptom Monitoring During Routine Cancer Treatment. JAMA. 11 luglio 2017;318(2):197–8.
  13. Gao WJ, Yuan CR. Self-management programme for cancer patients: a literature review. Int Nurs Rev. settembre 2011;58(3):288–95.
  14. Ahlstedt Karlsson S, Wallengren C, Olofsson Bagge R, Henoch I. «It is not just any pill»-Women’s experiences of endocrine therapy after breast cancer surgery. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). maggio 2019;28(3):e13009.
  15. Bryant AL, LeBlanc TW, Albrecht T, Chan YN, Richardson J, Foster M, et al. Oral adherence in adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML): results of a mixed methods study. Support Care Cancer Off J Multinatl Assoc Support Care Cancer. novembre 2020;28(11):5157–64.
  16. Doran. Nursing Outcomes: State of the Science. Jones & Bartlett Publishers; 2010. 537 p.
  17. Mokkink LB, Prinsen CAC, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW, Terwee CB. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument. Braz J Phys Ther. 2016;20(2):105–13.
  18. Jia L, Qiu J, Li P, Yang L, Xu L, Zhang X, et al. The self-management instrument for breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant therapy: Development and psychometric testing using the COSMIN methodology. Asia-Pac J Oncol Nurs. settembre 2023;10(9):100268.
  19. Coolbrandt A, Van den Heede K, Clemens K, Milisen K, Laenen A, Wildiers H, et al. The Leuven questionnaire for Patient Self-care during Chemotherapy (L-PaSC): instrument development and psychometric evaluation. Eur J Oncol Nurs Off J Eur Oncol Nurs Soc. giugno 2013;17(3):275–83.
  20. Nail LM, Jones LS, Greene D, Schipper DL, Jensen R. Use and perceived efficacy of self-care activities in patients receiving chemotherapy. Oncol Nurs Forum. luglio 1991;18(5):883–7.
  21. PRISMA-P Group, Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. dicembre 2015;4(1):1.
  22. Rethlefsen ML, Kirtley S, Waffenschmidt S, Ayala AP, Moher D, Page MJ, et al. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Syst Rev. 26 gennaio 2021;10(1):39.
  23. Prinsen C a. C, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, de Vet HCW, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil. maggio 2018;27(5):1147–57.
  24. Riegel B, Jaarsma T, Strömberg A. A middle-range theory of self-care of chronic illness. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2012;35(3):194–204.
  25. Denyes MJ, Orem DE, Bekel G. Self-Care: A Foundational Science. Nurs Sci Q. 1 gennaio 2001;14(1):48–54.
  26. Bramer WM, Giustini D, de Jonge GB, Holland L, Bekhuis T. De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote. J Med Libr Assoc JMLA. luglio 2016;104(3):240–3.
  27. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 5 dicembre 2016;5(1):210.
  28. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. J Clin Epidemiol. giugno 2021;134:103–12.
  29. Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen C a. C, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil. maggio 2018;27(5):1171–9.
  30. Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. gennaio 2007;60(1):34–42.
  31. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 26 aprile 2008;336(7650):924–6.