Development and implementation barriers of a new patient-reported measure: The Radiation therapy-related Inconvenience Questionnaire (RIQ).

INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy (RT) can benefit approximately 50% of cancer patients and contribute to 40% of all cancer cures, yet its utilisation in cancer is low globally. Several factors contribute to this including perceived inconvenience related to accessing and utilising RT. To quantitatively assess the latter, a new tool - the Radiation therapy-related Inconvenience Questionnaire (RIQ) - was developed. This study aimed to pre-test the RIQ and explore barriers and facilitators to implementing it in routine clinical practice and clinical trials. METHODS: Semi-structured cognitive interviews were conducted with patients undertaking RT, recruited via three hospitals to examine content validity, acceptability, and comprehensibility of the RIQ. Interviews identified inconsistencies, relevance, and clarity of items. Semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals involved in the delivery of care to individuals undertaking RT explored barriers and facilitators to routine usage. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes. RESULTS: Patients (N = 15) identified problems in content, instructions, layout, length, and response options; consequently, 25 items were revised and eight removed, resulting in a final 29-item questionnaire. Clinicians identified staff- and patient-specific barriers to implementing RIQ in clinical practice. Perceived facilitators included the following: (a) workplace factors, (b) mode of administration, and (c) imparting knowledge. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated acceptability and comprehensibility of the 29-item RIQ amongst cancer patients undertaking RT and treating clinicians. The next phase will evaluate the RIQ's measurement properties in a larger clinical study. The barriers and facilitators identified can guide future implementation of RIQ in clinical practice and clinical trials.

Body Image Scale: Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties in Three Indian Head and Neck Cancer Language Groups.

Background: Body image is a subjective concept encompassing a person's views and emotions about their body. Head and neck cancer (HNC) diagnosis and treatment affects several psychosocial concepts including body image. Large numbers of HNC patients are diagnosed each year in India but there are no suitable measures in regional languages to assess their body image. This study assessed the psychometric properties of the Body Image Scale (BIS), a measure suitable for clinical and research use in HNC populations, translated into Tamil, Telugu and Hindi and compared body image distress between language groups. Methods: Translated versions of BIS were completed by HNC patients recruited from three cancer centers across India one time only. Psychometric evaluation was conducted including factor analysis using principal component analysis and internal consistency reliability using Cronbach's alpha. Patients completed the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ) C-30 and EORTC QLQ HN-35 measures to enable exploration of convergent and discriminant validity. ANOVA was used to calculate difference in mean values for body image. Results: Our sample included 621 HNC patients (Tamil = 205, Telugu = 216, Hindi = 200). Factor analysis revealed a one-factor solution and Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranged between 0.891 and 0.969 indicating good reliability. Hypothesized correlations between similar and different constructs were as expected, supporting construct validity. On the BIS, we found a statistically significant difference (F = 11.0954, P < 0.05) between means of Tamil, Telugu, and Hindi groups, with higher body image scores in Telugu (M = 12.86; SD = 7.65) and Hindi groups (M = 12.52; SD = 7.36) indicating more symptoms/body image distress, when compared to Tamil population (M = 9.28; SD = 10.04). Conclusion: The reliability and validity of the three translated Indian versions of the BIS were maintained, providing a method for assessing body image of HNC population worldwide speaking Tamil, Telugu, and Hindi across the illness trajectory.

Patient-reported anxiety and depression measures for use in Indian head and neck cancer populations: a psychometric evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancers (HNC) are one of the most traumatic forms of cancer because they affect essential aspects of life such as speech, swallowing, eating and disfigurement. HNCs are common in India, with over 100,000 cases being registered each year. HNC and treatment are both associated with considerable anxiety and depression. With increasing multinational research, no suitable measures in Indian languages are available to assess anxiety and depression in Indian HNC patients. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of cross-culturally adapted versions of Zung's self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Patient health questionnaire - 9 (PHQ-9) in Tamil, Telugu and Hindi speaking Indian HNC populations. METHODS: HNC patients were recruited from three tertiary cancer centres in India. Patients completed the cross-culturally adapted versions of SAS and PHQ-9. We assessed targeting, scaling assumptions, construct validity (exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses), convergent validity, and internal consistency reliability. RESULTS: The study sample included 205 Tamil, 216 Telugu and 200 Hindi speaking HNC patients. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated a two-factor solution for PHQ-9 and four-factor solution for SAS in all three languages. Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranged between 0.717 and 0.890 for PHQ-9 and between 0.803 and 0.868 for SAS, indicating good reliability. Correlations between hypothesized scales were as expected providing evidence towards convergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: This first psychometric evaluation of the measurement properties of Tamil, Telugu and Hindi versions of the SAS and PHQ-9 in large, Indian HNC populations supported their use as severity and outcome measures across the disease and treatment continuum.

Enabling cross-cultural data pooling in trials: linguistic validation of head and neck cancer measures for Indian patients.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancers (HNC) and their treatments cause dysfunction and distress. Ongoing psychological assessment using disease-specific patient-reported measures may optimize clinical decision-making, facilitate interventions to reduce psychosocial burden. As most such measures are developed in English, non-English speaking patients are disadvantaged. This study translated HNC-specific measures (Body Image Scale, Patient Concerns Inventory, Zung's Self-Rating Anxiety and Depression Scales and Patient Health Questionnaire-9) into three Indian languages (Hindi, Tamil and Telugu) and linguistically validated them. METHODS: Translation followed established guidelines on translation and linguistic validation of measures. Process involved two independent forward translations, reconciliation, two independent backward translations by bilingual experts, and cognitive debriefing interviews with nine healthcare professionals (HCPs) and 29 HNC patients. Translated versions were compared with the original versions for semantic, cultural and conceptual equivalence. RESULTS: Overall, 17 Hindi items, 19 Tamil items and 13 Telugu items were identified to have semantic, cultural and/or conceptual issues. These were resolved to achieve equivalence with the original measures. Interviews with HCPs indicated that equivalent terms for words such as anxiety, panicky, sexuality, and self-conscious might be difficult to understand. Interviews with patients indicated all items were understandable, easy, sensitive, unambiguous and relevant. Hence, no further revisions were made. CONCLUSIONS: The translated Hindi, Tamil and Telugu versions of the Body image scale, Patient concerns inventory, Zung's self-rating anxiety and depression scales and Patient health questionnaire-9 measures are conceptually and linguistically validated and equivalent with the original English versions. Psychometric validation of these measures with relevant patient populations is needed.

Why do delays to diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer occur? A mixed methods study of insights from Australian clinicians.

AIMS: Delays in lung cancer diagnosis and treatment can impact survival. We explored reasons for delays experienced by patients with lung cancer to identify themes and strategies for improvement. METHODS: We used national timeframe recommendations and standardized definitions to identify General Practitioners and specialists caring for 34 patients who experienced delays in our previous Medicare data linkage study. Clinicians participated in a survey and interview, including qualitative (exploratory, open-ended questions) and quantitative (rating scales) components. Exploratory content analysis, cross-case triangulation, and descriptive statistics were performed. Krippendorff's coefficient was used to assess level of agreement between clinicians and patients, and among clinicians, on perceived delays. RESULTS: Overall, 27 out of 50 (54%) eligible clinicians participated (including 11 respiratory physicians and seven medical oncologists). Dominant themes for perceived causes of delay included referral barriers, limited General Practitioner (GP) awareness of subtle clinical presentations, insufficient radiology interpretation, and lack of cancer coordinators. "Unavoidable" delays may occur due to clinical circumstances. Awareness and uptake of referral and timeframe guidelines were low, with clinicians using professional networks over guidelines. There was no consistent agreement on perceived delays between patients and clinicians, and among clinicians (Krippendorff's coefficient .03 [P = .8]). CONCLUSIONS: Strategies for minimizing avoidable delays include efficient GP to specialist referral and more lung cancer coordinators to assist with patient expectations and waitlist management. Clinicians' reliance on experience, rather than guidelines, indicates need to review guideline utility. Raising awareness of benchmarks and unavoidable barriers may recalibrate perceptions of "delays" to diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer.

What are the optimal measures to identify anxiety and depression in people diagnosed with head and neck cancer (HNC): a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A cancer diagnosis is potentially life-threatening, likely causing distress and uncertainty, which may be psychologically debilitating. Depression and anxiety are commonly underdiagnosed and undertreated in cancer patients. Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients face particular challenges that may contribute to distress. This review aims to: i) identify patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) designed to assess anxiety and depression in HNC; and ii) determine their suitability for use in research and clinical practice to screen patients. METHODS: We searched five electronic databases between July 2007 to July 2019 for studies assessing anxiety and depression in HNC patients. Searches were limited to this period to account for advances in cancer treatment. Records were screened for eligibility by one reviewer and 10% cross-checked by a second across all stages of the review. In addition to the electronic searches, PROM databases were searched for additional measures of anxiety and depression. All retrieved PROMs were mapped against Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5 criteria for anxiety and depression to assess content coverage. Then, their psychometric properties appraised against the COSMIN checklist. RESULTS: Electronic searches identified 98 records, from which five anxiety and eight depression measures were retrieved. PROM database searches retrieved an additional four anxiety and four depression measures; a total of nine anxiety and 12 depression measures were appraised. Content coverage of anxiety measures ranged from 50% to 75% and depression measures from 42% to 100%. Demonstration of psychometric properties against COSMIN criteria ranged from 57% to 71% for anxiety measures (three PROMs > 70%) and from 29% to 86% for depression measures (nine PROMs > 70%). Three anxiety and seven depression measures had established clinical cut-offs in cancer populations. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Zung Self-rating Depression and Zung Self-rating Anxiety Scales demonstrated good content coverage along with excellent psychometric properties, and thus were considered the most suitable PROMs to assess psychological distress in HNC populations. It is important to have PROMs assessing psychological distress that capture a comprehensive set of subjective symptoms. The identified PROMs will help researchers and health professionals in clinical-decision making, thereby potentially improving quality of life in HNC patients.

Content comparison of unmet needs self-report measures used in patients with head and neck cancer: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Morbidity from head and neck cancers (HNCs) and their treatment are significant, given their proximity to anatomical sites impacting facial appearance and function. Assessing the needs of HNC patients throughout their cancer journey is critical to informing quality care and improving quality of life. We aimed to identify available unmet needs measures in the HNC setting and appraise their content and psychometric properties. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases (July 2007-July 2019) to identify studies of unmet needs in patients with HNC. In addition, three web-based patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) databases were searched for unmet needs measures. Citations were screened for eligibility and identified measures reviewed for content coverage and psychometric properties. From identified measures and literature, a conceptual framework with 12 clinically relevant aspects of unmet needs was developed and used to assess the conceptual coverage of available unmet needs measures. RESULTS: Literature search identified 273 records of which 28 studies assessing unmet needs in HNC cancer met eligibility criteria. Seven unmet needs measures were identified from retrieved studies and seven additional measures from PROM databases. Thus, 14 measures in total were reviewed. Content mapping revealed that three measures demonstrated excellent content validity (greater than 80% conceptual coverage): Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI), Needs Assessment for Advanced Cancer Patients (NA-ACP), and James Supportive Care Screening (JSCS). CONCLUSION: We recommend PCI be used to measure unmet needs in the HNC setting considering the importance of content validity over quantitative psychometric properties.