Validation of the Symptom Screening in Pediatrics Tool in Children Receiving Cancer Treatments

L Lee Dupuis, Donna L Johnston, Christina Baggott, Shannon Hyslop, Deborah Tomlinson, Paul Gibson, Andrea Orsey, David Dix, Vicky Price, Magimairajan Vanan, Carol Portwine, Susan Kuczynski, Brenda Spiegler, George A Tomlinson, Lillian Sung, L Lee Dupuis, Donna L Johnston, Christina Baggott, Shannon Hyslop, Deborah Tomlinson, Paul Gibson, Andrea Orsey, David Dix, Vicky Price, Magimairajan Vanan, Carol Portwine, Susan Kuczynski, Brenda Spiegler, George A Tomlinson, Lillian Sung

Abstract

Background: The objective was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the self-report Symptom Screening in Pediatrics Tool (SSPedi) from the perspective of children with cancer and pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients.

Methods: In this multicenter study, respondents were children age eight to 18 years who had cancer or had received HSCT, and their parents. Two different child respondent populations were targeted. More symptomatic respondents were receiving active treatment for cancer, admitted to the hospital, and expected to be in the hospital three days later. Less symptomatic respondents were in maintenance therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia or had completed cancer therapy. Children completed SSPedi and then responded to validated self-report measures of mucositis, nausea, pain, and global quality of life. Children in the more symptomatic group repeated SSPedi and a global symptom change scale three days later. Parent proxy-report was optional. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlations while convergent validity was evaluated using Spearman correlations.

Results: Of 502 children enrolled, 302 were in the more symptomatic group and 200 were in the less symptomatic group. Intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82 to 0.92) for test-retest reliability and 0.76 (95% CI = 0.71 to 0.80) for inter-rater reliability. The mean difference in SSPedi scores between more and less symptomatic groups was 7.8 (95% CI = 6.4 to 9.2). SSPedi was responsive to change in global symptoms. All hypothesized relationships among measures were observed.

Conclusions: SSPedi is a self-report symptom bother tool for children with cancer and HSCT recipients that is reliable, valid, and responsive to change. SSPedi can be used for clinical and research purposes. Future work should focus on integration into care delivery.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of participant identification, enrollment, and study participation.

References

    1. Canadian Cancer Society's Steering Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2011. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2011.
    1. Baggott C, Dodd M, Kennedy C, et al. . Changes in children's reports of symptom occurrence and severity during a course of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 2010;27(6):307–315.
    1. Miller E, Jacob E, Hockenberry MJ.. Nausea, pain, fatigue, and multiple symptoms in hospitalized children with cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2011;38(5):E382–E393.
    1. Poder U, Ljungman G, von Essen L.. Parents' perceptions of their children's cancer-related symptoms during treatment: A prospective, longitudinal study. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;40(5):661–670.
    1. Oeffinger KC, Mertens AC, Sklar CA, et al. . Chronic health conditions in adult survivors of childhood cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(15):1572–1582.
    1. Dupuis LL, Tomlinson D, Ethier MC, et al. . A systematic review of symptom assessment scales in children with cancer. BMC Cancer. 2012;12(1):430.
    1. Tomlinson D, Dupuis LL, Gibson P, et al. . Initial development of the Symptom Screening in Pediatrics Tool (SSPedi). Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(1):71–75.
    1. O'Sullivan C, Dupuis LL, Sung L.. A review of symptom screening tools in pediatric cancer patients. Curr Opin Oncol. 2015;27(4):285–290.
    1. O'Sullivan C, Dupuis LL, Gibson P, et al. . Refinement of the symptom screening in pediatrics tool (SSPedi). Br J Cancer. 2014;111(7):1262–1268.
    1. O'Sullivan C, Dupuis LL, Gibson P, et al. . Evaluation of the electronic self-report Symptom Screening in Pediatrics Tool (SSPedi). BMJ Support Palliat Care. In press.
    1. Jacobs S, Baggott C, Agarwal R, et al. . Validation of the Children's International Mucositis Evaluation Scale (ChIMES) in paediatric cancer and SCT. Br J Cancer. 2013;109(10):2515–2522.
    1. Dupuis LL, Taddio A, Kerr EN, et al. . Development and validation of the pediatric nausea assessment tool for use in children receiving antineoplastic agents. Pharmacotherapy. 2006;26(9):1221–1231.
    1. Von Baeyer CL, Hicks CL.. Support for a common metric for pediatric pain intensity scales. Pediatr Pain Manag. 2000;5(2):157–160.
    1. Tomlinson D, von Baeyer CL, Stinson JN, et al. . A systematic review of faces scales for the self-report of pain intensity in children. Pediatrics. 2010;126(5):e1168–e1198.
    1. Sung L, Greenberg ML, Doyle JJ, et al. . Construct validation of the Health Utilities Index and the Child Health Questionnaire in children undergoing cancer chemotherapy. Br J Cancer. 2003;88(8):1185–1190.
    1. Sung L, Young NL, Greenberg ML, et al. . Health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores reported from parents and their children with chronic illness differed depending on utility elicitation method. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(11):1161–1166.
    1. Streiner DL, Norman GR.. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 2nd ed Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995.
    1. Eiser C, Morse R.. Can parents rate their child's health-related quality of life? Results of a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2001;10(4):347–357.
    1. Donner A, Eliasziw M.. Sample size requirements for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1987;6(4):441–448.
    1. Walter SD, Eliasziw M, Donner A.. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1998;17(1):101–110.
    1. Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modelling With EQS: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2006.
    1. Detmar SB, Muller MJ, Schornagel JH, et al. . Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient-physician communication: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288(23):3027–3034.
    1. Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, et al. . Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: A randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(6):557–565.
    1. Velikova G, Booth L, Smith AB, et al. . Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(4):714–724.
    1. Bruera E, Kuehn N, Miller MJ, et al. . The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS): A simple method for the assessment of palliative care patients. J Palliat Care. 1991;7(2):6–9.
    1. Barbera L, Sutradhar R, Howell D, et al. . Does routine symptom screening with ESAS decrease ED visits in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy? Support Care Cancer. 2015;23(10):3025–3032.
    1. Seow H, Sussman J, Martelli-Reid L, et al. . Do high symptom scores trigger clinical actions? An audit after implementing electronic symptom screening. J Oncol Pract. 2012;8(6):e142–e148.
    1. Basch E, Deal AM, Dueck AC, et al. . Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment. JAMA. 2017;318(2):197–198.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다