Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer-refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample.
Michael, Natasha; Gorelik, Alex; Georgousopoulou, Ekavi; Sulistio, Merlina; Tee, Patrick; Hauser, Katherine; Kissane, David.
Afiliação
  • Michael N; Supportive, Psychosocial and Palliative Care Research Department, Cabrini Health, 646 High Street, Prahran, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. nmichael@cabrini.com.au.
  • Gorelik A; School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame Australia , NSW, Australia. nmichael@cabrini.com.au.
  • Georgousopoulou E; Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne VIC, Australia. nmichael@cabrini.com.au.
  • Sulistio M; Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Tee P; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne VIC, Australia.
  • Hauser K; Department of Medicine (RMH), University of Melbourne, Melbourne VIC, Australia.
  • Kissane D; School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame Australia , NSW, Australia.
Support Care Cancer ; 30(9): 7387-7396, 2022 Sep.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35612665
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to expand the international psychometric validation of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool for Patients and Families (CCAT-PF) within a sample of Australian cancer patients. METHODS: Survey data from 181 cancer patient-caregiver dyads ≥ 18 years of age with solid or haematological cancers were analysed (85.4% response rate). Spearman's rho was used to examine the correlation between CCAT-P and CCAT-F scores and weighted kappa the agreement between them. Exploratory factor analysis using scree plot and Kaiser-Guttman criteria was conducted to evaluate the scale structure. Cronbach's α and Pearson correlation coefficients were used to measure internal consistency and concurrent validity respectively. RESULTS: Mean scores were the following: CCAT-P 46.2 (9.8), CCAT-F 45.7 (9.4), and CCAT-PF 24.1 (8.0). We confirmed the poor concordance between patient and caregiver reporting of items in the CCAT-PF, with all but two items having weighted kappa values < 0.20 and Spearman's rho < 0.19. We derived a three-factor solution, disclosure, limitation of treatment, and treatment decision making, with reliability ranging from Cronbach's α = 0.43-0.53. The CCAT-P and CCAT-F showed strong correlations with preparation for decision-making (CCAT-P: r = 0.0.92; CCATF: r = 0.0.93) but were weakly associated with patient/caregiver distress related with having difficult conversations on future care planning. CONCLUSION: Preliminary validation of the CCAT-PF in the Australian setting has shown some similar psychometric properties to previously published studies, further supporting its potential utility as a tool to assess patient-caregiver dyadic communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620001035910 12/10/2020 retrospectively registered.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cuidadores / Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Revista: Support Care Cancer Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cuidadores / Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Revista: Support Care Cancer Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article