The Survivor Unmet Needs Survey (SUNS) for haematological cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study assessing the relevance and psychometric properties

BMC Health Services Research

Marita Lynagh²  Rob Sanson-Fisher²  Flora Tzelepis²  Catherine D’Este¹  Alix Hall² 

[1]National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, ANU College of Medicine, Biology & Environment, Australian National University, Acton, Canberra, ACT, Australia

[2]Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, Faculty of Health, The University of Newcastle & Hunter Medical Research Institute, Callaghan, NSW, Australia

关键词: Unmet needs;    Psycho-oncology;    Needs assessment;    Psychometric evaluation;    Haematological cancer survivors;   

Others  :  1131177
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6963-14-211

 received in 2013-10-20, accepted in 2014-04-30,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Relevant and psychometrically sound needs assessment tools are necessary for accurate assessment of haematological cancer survivors unmet needs. No previous study has developed nor psychometrically evaluated a comprehensive needs assessment tool for use with population-based samples of haematological cancer survivors. This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Survivor Unmet Needs Survey (SUNS) with haematological cancer survivors.

Methods

The relevance, content and face validity of the SUNS to haematological cancer survivors was assessed using qualitative interviews. Psychometric evaluation was conducted using data collected from haematological cancer survivors, aged 18–80 years at recruitment and recruited from four Australian cancer registries. Construct, convergent and discriminant validity; internal reliability and floor and ceiling effects were assessed. A second survey was completed by a sub-sample of survivors recruited from two of the four registries to assess test-retest reliability.

Results

Results from 17 qualitative interviews confirmed the relevance, face and content validity of the original items of the SUNS for use with haematological cancer survivors. Overall, 1,957 eligible haematological cancer survivors were contacted by the cancer registries. Of these 1,280 were sent a survey, and 715 returned a survey (37% of eligible survivors contacted and 56% of survivors sent a survey). A total of 529 survivors completed all 89 items of the SUNS and were included in the exploratory factor analysis. Exploratory factor analysis supported the original five-factor structure of the SUNS. Evidence for convergent validity was established, with all five domains of the SUNS illustrating a moderate positive correlation with all three subscales of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). All Cronbach’s alpha values were above 0.9 and all corrected item-total correlations were acceptable (>0.2). Criteria for discriminant validity was not met, with only 10 of the 15 (67%) a-priori hypotheses supported. Test-retest reliability was acceptable for 40 of the 89 items (45%) and for three of the five domains. Significant floor effects were evident for all five domains.

Conclusions

The SUNS demonstrates evidence for multiple features of validity and reliability as a measure of unmet needs for haematological cancer survivors. However, evidence supporting some psychometric properties was limited.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Hall et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Butters G: Blood cancers, chemotherapy and the risks of neutropenia. Nurs Times 2011, 107:19.
• [2]National Institute for Clincial Excellence (NICE): Health Care Services for Haematological Cancers. London: National Health Service; 2003.
• [3]National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE): Guidance On Cancer Services Improving Outcomes In Haematological Cancers: The Manual. London: National Health Service; 2003.
• [4]Smith A, Howell D, Patmore R, Jack A, Roman E: Incidence of haematological malignancy by sub-type: A report from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network. Br J Haematol 2011, 105:1684-1692.
• [5]American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures 2012. Atlanta, Georgia: American Cancer Society Inc.; 2012.
• [6]Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW): Cancer survival and prevalence in Australia: period estimates from 1982 to 2010. Canberra: AIHW; 2012. [Cancer Series no. 69. Cat. no. CAN 65]
• [7]Verdecchia A, Francisci S, Brenner H, Gatta G, Micheli A, Mangone L, Kunkler I, The EUROCARE-4 working group: Recent cancer survival in Europe: A 2000–02 period analysis of EUROCARE-4 data. Lancet Oncol 2007, 8:784-796.
• [8]Horn J, Campbell K: Support needs of patients with a diagnosis of follicular lymphoma. Cancer Nurs Pract 2010, 9:34-37.
• [9]Molassiotis A, Wilson B, Blair S, Howe T, Cavet J: Unmet supportive care needs, psychological well-being and quality of life in patients living with multiple myeloma and their partners. Psychooncology 2011, 20:88-97.
• [10]Manitta V, Zordan R, Cole-Sinclair M, Nandurkar H, Philip J: The symptom burden of patients with hematological malignancy: A cross-sectional observational study. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011, 42:432-442.
• [11]Montgomery C, Pocock M, Titley K, Lloyd K: Predicting psychological distress in patients with leukaemia and lymphoma. J Psychosom Res 2003, 54:289-292.
• [12]Molassiotis A, Wilson B, Blair S, Howe T, Cavet J: Living with multiple myeloma: Experiences of patients and their formal caregivers. Support Care Cancer 2011, 19:101-111.
• [13]Paul CL, Hall AE, Carey ML, Cameron EC, Clinton-McHarg T: Access to care and impacts of cancer on daily life: Do they differ for metropolitan versus regional hematological cancer survivors? J Rural Health 2013, 29:S43-S50.
• [14]Mehnert A: Employment and work-related issues in cancer survivors. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2011, 77:109-130.
• [15]Taskila T, Lindbohm L: Factors affecting cancer survivors’ employment and work ability. Acta Oncol 2007, 46:446-451.
• [16]State Government Victoria: Providing Optimal Cancer Care: Supportive care policy for Victoria. Melbourne: Metropolitan Health and Aged Care Services Division; 2009. [Victorian Government Department of Human Services]
• [17]Howell D, Currie S, Mayo S, Jones G, Boyle M, Hack T, Green E, Hoffman L, Simpson J, Collacutt V, McLeod D, Digout C: A Pan-Canadian clinical practice guideline: Assessment of psychosocial health care needs of the adult cancer patient. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Cancer Journey Action Group) and the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology; 2009.
• [18]Boyes AW, Girgis A, Lecathelinais C: Brief assessment of adult cancer patients’ perceived needs: development and validation of the 34-item Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34). J Eval Clin Pract 2009, 15:602-606.
• [19]Sanson-Fisher R, Girgis A, Boyes A, Bonevski B, Burton L, Cook P, The Supportive Care Review Group: The unmet supportive care needs of patients with cancer. Cancer 2000, 88:225-236.
• [20]Harrison JD, Young JM, Price MA, Butow P, Solomon MJ: What are the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer? A systematic review. Support Care Cancer 2009, 17:1117-1128.
• [21]Wen KY, Gustafson DH: Needs assessment for cancer patients and their families. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2004, 2:11. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Osse BHP, Vernooij-Dassen MJFJ, de Vree BPW, Schade E, Grol RPTM: Assessment of the need for palliative care as perceived by individual cancer patients and their families: A review of instruments for improving patient participation in palliative care. Cancer 2000, 88:900-911.
• [23]Howell D, Mayo S, Currie S, Jones G, Boyle M, Hack T, Green E, Hoffman L, Collacutt V, McLeod D, Simpson J: Psychosocial health care needs assessment of adult cancer patients: A consensus-based guideline. Support Care Cancer 2012, 20:3343-3354.
• [24]Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW: Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007, 60:34-42.
• [25]Pearce NJM, Sanson-Fisher R, Campbell HS: Measuring quality of life in cancer survivors: A methodological review of existing scales. Psychooncology 2008, 17:629-640.
• [26]Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust: Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:193-205.
• [27]Hodgkinson K, Butow P, Hunt GE, Pendlebury S, Hobbs KM, Lo SK, Wain G: The development and evaluation of a measure to assess cancer survivors’ unmet supportive care needs: The CaSUN (Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs measure). Psychooncology 2007, 16:769-804.
• [28]Campbell HS, Sanson-Fisher R, Turner D, Hayward L, Wang XS, Taylor-Brown J: Psychometric properties of cancer survivors’ unmet needs survey. Support Care Cancer 2010, 19:221-230.
• [29]Hall AE, Campbell HS, Sanson-Fisher R, Lynagh MC, D’Este C, Burkhalter R, Carey M: Unmet needs of Australian and Canadian haematological cancer survivors: A cross-sectional international comparative study. Psychooncology 2013, 22:2032-2038.
• [30]Hall AE, Sanson-Fisher RW, Lynagh MC, Threlfall T, D’Este CA: Format and readability of an enhanced invitation letter did not affect participation rates in a cancer registry-based study: A randomized controlled trial. J Clin Epidemiol 2013, 66:85-94.
• [31]Clinton-McHarg T, Carey M, Sanson-Fisher R, Tracey E: Recruitment of representative samples for low incidence cancer populations: Do registries deliver? BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:5.
• [32]Beskow LM, Sandler RS, Weinberger M: Research recruitment through US central cancer registries: Balancing privacy and scientific issues. Am J Public Health 2006, 96:1920-1926.
• [33]Antony MM, Bieling PJ, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Swinson RP: Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychol Assess 1998, 10:176-181.
• [34]Clara IP, Cox BJ, Enns MW: Confirmatory factor analysis of the Depression-Anxiety-Stress Scales in depressed and anxious patients. J Psychopathology Behav Assessment 2001, 23:61-67.
• [35]School of Psychology University of New South Wales: DASS FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions). Accessed March 2013 [http://www2.psy.unsw.edu.au/Groups/Dass/DASSFAQ.htm webcite]
• [36]Ng F, Trauer T, Dodd S, Callaly T, Campbell S, Berk M: The validity of the 21-item version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales as a routine clinical outcome measure. Acta Neuropsychiatr 2007, 19:304-310.
• [37]Henry JD, Crawford JR: The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in large non-clinical sample. Brit J Clin Psychol 2005, 44:227-239.
• [38]de Vet HCW, Ader HJ, Terwee CB, Pouwer F: Are factor analytical techniques used appropriately in the validation of health status questionnaires? A systematic review on the quality of factor analysis of the SF-36. Qual Life Res 2005, 14:1203-1218.
• [39]Costello AB, Osborne JW: Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Prac Assess Res Eval 2005, 10:9.
• [40]Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ: Evaluating the use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods 1999, 4:272-299.
• [41]Worthington RL, Whittaker TA: Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practice. Couns Psychol 2006, 34:806-838.
• [42]Armes J, Crowe M, Colbourne L, Morgan H, Murrells T, Oakley C, Palmer N, Ream E, Young A, Richardson A: Patients’ supportive care needs beyond the end of cancer treatment: A prospective, longitudinal survey. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:6172-6179.
• [43]Beesley V, Eakin E, Steginga S, Aitken J, Dunn J, Battistutta D: Unmet needs of gynaecological cancer survivors: Implications for developing community support services. Psychooncology 2008, 17:392-400.
• [44]Harrison SE, Watson EK, Ward AM, Khan NF, Turner D, Adams E, Forman D, Roche MF, Rose PW: Primary health and supportive care needs of long-term cancer survivors: A questionnaire survey. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:2091-2098.
• [45]Boyes AW, Girgis A, D’Este CA, Zucca A: Prevalence and correlates of cancer survivors’ supportive care needs 6 months after diagnosis: A population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer 2012, 12:150. BioMed Central Full Text
• [46]Girgis A, Boyes A, Sanson-Fisher R, Burrows S: Perceived needs of women diagnosed with breast cancer: Rural versus urban location. Aust New Zeal Public Health 2000, 24:166-173.
• [47]Hall AE, Boyes AW, Bowman J, Walsh RA, James EL, Girgis A: Young adult cancer survivors’ psychosocial well-being: A cross-sectional study assessing quality of life, unmet needs, and health behaviors. Support Care Cancer 2012, 20:1333-1341.
• [48]Li J, Girgis A: Supportive care needs: Are patients with lung cancer a neglected population? Psychooncology 2006, 15:509-516.
• [49]Lobb EA, Joske D, Butow P, Kristjanson LJ, Cannell P, Cull G, Augustson B: When the safety net of treatment has been removed: Patients’ unmet needs at the completion of treatment for haematological malignancies. Patient Educ Couns 2009, 77:103-108.
• [50]Steginga SK, Occhipinti S, Dunn J, Gardiner RA, Heathcote P, Yaxley J: The supportive care needs of men with prostate cancer (2000). Psychooncology 2001, 10:66-75.
• [51]Aranada S, Schofield P, Weih L, Yates P, Milne D, Faulkner R, Voundouris N: Mapping the quality of life and unmet needs of urban women with metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Care 2005, 14:211-222.
• [52]Clinton-McHarg T, Carey M, Sanson-Fisher R, D’Este C, Shakeshaft A: Preliminary development and psychometric evaluation of an unmet needs measure for adolescents and young adults with cancer: The Cancer Needs Questionnaire - Young People (CNQ-YP). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012, 10:13. BioMed Central Full Text
• [53]Sim J, Wright CC: The Kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample requirements. Phys Ther 2005, 85:257-268.
• [54]Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174.
• [55]Floyd FJ, Widaman KF: Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assess 1995, 7:286-299.
• [56]Charter RA: Sample size requirements for precise estimates of reliability, generalizability, and validity coefficients. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 1999, 21:559-566.
• [57]Charter RA: Study samples are too small to produce sufficiently precise reliability coefficients. J Gen Psychol 2003, 130:117-129.
• [58]Campbell HS, Hall AE, Sanson-Fisher RW, Barker D, Turner D, Taylor-Brown J: Development and validation of the Short-Form Survivor Unmet Needs Survey (SF-SUNS). Support Care Cancer 2014, 22(4):107-109.
• [59]Hammond CTC, Beckjord EB, Arora NK, Bellizzi KM, Jeffery DD, Aziz NM: Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma survivors’ fertility and sexual function-related information needs. Fertil Steril 2008, 90:1256-1258.
• [60]Smith T, Stein KD, Mehta CC, Kaw C, Kepner JL, Buskirk T, Stafford J, Baker F: The rationale, design, and implementation of the American Cancer Society’s studies of cancer survivors. Cancer 2007, 109:1-12.
• [61]Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, Diguiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I: Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009. Issue 3. Art. No.: MR000008. doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000008.pub4