Psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale in breast cancer survivors

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Sue Kim¹  Carol Estwing Ferrans²  Chang Gi Park²  Min Kyeong Jang²  Eileen G. Collins²  Lauretta T. Quinn²  Nancy W. Glynn³ 

[1] College of Nursing, Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, Yonsei University;Department of Biobehavioral Nursing Science, College of Nursing, University of Illinois at Chicago;Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh;

关键词: Breast neoplasms;    Cancer;    Fatigability;    Fatigue;    Oncology;    Psycho-oncology;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12955-021-01815-8

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Abstract Background Fatigability has recently emerged in oncology as a concept that anchors patients’ perceptions of fatigue to defined activities of specified duration and intensity. This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale (K-PFS) for women with breast cancer. Methods This cross-sectional study involved 196 women with breast cancer recruited from a tertiary hospital in Seoul, Korea. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha, and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the factor structure of the K-PFS. Four goodness-of-fit values were evaluated: (1) the comparative fit index (CFI), (2) the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), (3) the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and (4) the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Results Of the 196 survivors, 71.1% had greater physical fatigability (K-PFS Physical score ≥ 15) and 52.6% had greater mental fatigability (K-PFS Mental score ≥ 13). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total K-PFS scale was 0.926, and the coefficients for the physical and mental fatigability domains were 0.870 and 0.864, respectively. In the confirmatory factor analysis for physical fatigability, the SRMR value (0.076) supported goodness of fit, but other model fit statistics did not (CFI = 0.888, TLI = 0.826, and RMSEA = 0.224). For mental fatigability, although three goodness-of-fit values were acceptable (CFI = 0.948, TLI = 0.919, and SRMR = 0.057), the RMSEA value (0.149) did not indicate good model fit. However, each item coefficient was statistically significant (> 0.5), and the K-PFS was therefore found to be valid from a theoretical perspective. Conclusion This study provides meaningful information on the reliability and validity of the K-PFS instrument, which was developed to meet an important need in the context of breast cancer survivors. Additional research should examine its test–retest reliability and construct validity with performance measures.

【 授权许可】

Unknown