Assessment Tools of Patient Competences: The Spanish Version of the R-NPQ and Three Practical Cases in Women with Breast Cancer and Persistent Pain

María Torres-Lacomba, Beatriz Navarro-Brazález, Javier Bailón-Cerezo, Fernando Vergara-Pérez, Irene de la Rosa-Díaz, Virginia Prieto-Gómez, María Torres-Lacomba, Beatriz Navarro-Brazález, Javier Bailón-Cerezo, Fernando Vergara-Pérez, Irene de la Rosa-Díaz, Virginia Prieto-Gómez

Abstract

Persistent pain following treatment for breast cancer (PPBCT) is a prevalent and complex clinical issue. Education together with physiotherapy have been shown to lessen pain and disability in chronic pain. Although the evaluation of the patient's competences is a major part of the educational program, the published educational programs rarely describe the tools used to assess competences, especially regarding those related to decision-making and problem-solving. The aim of this study was to provide two competences assessment tools: the cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish version of the Revised Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire (R-NPQ) and practical cases of women with PPBCT. The Spanish cross-cultural adaptation was conducted following recognized criteria. Measurement properties testing included an analysis of construct validity (known-groups approach), reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), responsiveness, interpretability, and feasibility. To promote a tool that would allow evaluation of the educational program competences, a group of experts developed three cases extracted from real contexts by means of an iterative process. A total of 80 women with PPBCT (mean age 56 years) and 81 physiotherapy students (mean age 20 years) participated in the measurement properties analysis. The three developed cases were presented to the same 80 women with PPBCT before and after the educational program. As we expected, students showed a significantly higher score (p < 0.001) than did women with PPBCT in the R-NPQ questionnaire, with a large effect size (d = 2.49), demonstrating good construct validity. The Cronbach alpha was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.92) and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73-0.88). A large effect size (5.2) was found, as we expected, between baseline and post-treatment scores, suggesting adequate responsiveness. In addition, identifying and analyzing, decision making, communicating needs, knowing how to manage, and problem-solving skills were evaluated through the three practical cases. Most women (88.75%) reached the highest level in the assessment rubric of the proposed practical cases. The Spanish R-NPQ is a comprehensible, valid, reliable, and responsive tool for Spanish women with PPBCT. The practical cases are a useful competence assessment tool and were well accepted by women with PPBCT. Further studies are needed to investigate more competence assessment tools and to investigate whether the achievement of different levels of competences has an effect on health behaviors.

Keywords: Spanish validation; breast cancer; competence assessment tools; pain; patient competence assessment; patient education; revised neurophysiology of pain questionnaire (R-NPQ).

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Dafni U., Tsourti Z., Alatsathianos I. Breast Cancer Statistics in the European Union: Incidence and Survival across European Countries. Breast Care. 2019;14:344–353. doi: 10.1159/000503219.
    1. Mejdahl M.K., Andersen K.G., Gärtner R., Kroman N., Kehlet H. Persistent pain and sensory disturbances after treatment for breast cancer: Six year nationwide follow-up study. BMJ Clin. Res. Ed. 2013;346:f1865. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f1865.
    1. Hamood R., Hamood H., Merhasin I., Keinan-Boker L. Chronic pain and other symptoms among breast cancer survivors: Prevalence, predictors, and effects on quality of life. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2018;167:157–169. doi: 10.1007/s10549-017-4485-0.
    1. Nijs J., Leysen L., Adriaenssens N., Aguilar Ferrándiz M.E., Devoogdt N., Tassenoy A., Ickmans K., Goubert D., van Wilgen C.P., Wijma A.J., et al. Pain following cancer treatment: Guidelines for the clinical classification of predominant neuropathic, nociceptive and central sensitization pain. Acta Oncol. 2016;55:659–663. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2016.1167958.
    1. Wang K., Yee C., Tam S., Drost L., Chan S., Zaki P., Rico V., Ariello K., Dasios M., Lam H., et al. Prevalence of pain in patients with breast cancer post-treatment: A systematic review. Breast. 2018;42:113–127. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.08.105.
    1. Patrick D.L., Ferketich S.L., Frame P.S., Harris J.J., Hendricks C.B., Levin B., Link M.P., Lustig C., McLaughlin J., Ried L.D., et al. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Symptom Management in Cancer: Pain, Depression, and Fatigue, 15–17 July 2002. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2003;95:1110–1117. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djh210.
    1. Feeney L.R., Tormey S.M., Harmon D.C. Breast cancer and chronic pain: A mixed methods review. Ir. J. Med. Sci. 2018;187:877–885. doi: 10.1007/s11845-018-1760-y.
    1. Bovbjerg D.H., Keefe F.J., Soo M.S., Manculich J., Van Denburg A., Zuley M.L., Ahrendt G.M., Skinner C.S., Edmond S.N., Shelby R.A. Persistent breast pain in post-surgery breast cancer survivors and women with no history of breast surgery or cancer: Associations with pain catastrophizing, perceived breast cancer risk, breast cancer worry, and emotional distress. Acta Oncol. 2019;58:763–768. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2019.1574023.
    1. Magee D., Bachtold S., Brown M., Farquhar-Smith P. Cancer pain: Where are we now? Pain Manag. 2019;9:63–79. doi: 10.2217/pmt-2018-0031.
    1. Chimenti R.L., Frey-Law L.A., Sluka K.A. A Mechanism-Based Approach to Physical Therapist Management of Pain. Phys. Ther. 2018;98:302–314. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzy030.
    1. Giacalone A., Alessandria P., Ruberti E. The Physiotherapy Intervention for Shoulder Pain in Patients Treated for Breast Cancer: Systematic Review. Cureus. 2019;11:e6416. doi: 10.7759/cureus.6416.
    1. Nijs J., Meeus M., Cagnie B., Roussel N.A., Dolphens M., Van Oosterwijck J., Danneels L. A modern neuroscience approach to chronic spinal pain: Combining pain neuroscience education with cognition-targeted motor control training. Phys. Ther. 2014;94:730–738. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20130258.
    1. Pinheiro da Silva F., Moreira G.M., Zomkowski K., de Noronha M.A., Flores Sperandio F. Manual Therapy as Treatment for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in Female Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Manip. Physiol. Ther. 2019;42:503–513. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2018.12.007.
    1. Prieto-Gómez V., Torres-Lacomba M., Navarro-Brazález B., Yuste-Sánchez M.J., Carazo-Díaz C., Falla D. Is multimodal physiotherapy more effective than exercise alone in women with persistent pain following breast cancer treatment? A randomized clinical trial. J. Physiother. 2021 under review.
    1. Silva Guerrero A.V., Maujean A., Campbell L., Sterling M. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Psychological Interventions Delivered by Physiotherapists on Pain, Disability and Psychological Outcomes in Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions. Clin. J. Pain. 2018;34:838–857. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000601.
    1. Adam R., Bond C., Murchie P. Educational interventions for cancer pain. A systematic review of systematic reviews with nested narrative review of randomized controlled trials. Patient Educ. Couns. 2015;98:269–282. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.11.003.
    1. Hulbert-Williams N.J., Storey L., Wilson K.G. Psychological interventions for patients with cancer: Psychological flexibility and the potential utility of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Eur. J. Cancer Care. 2015;24:15–27. doi: 10.1111/ecc.12223.
    1. Lagger G., Pataky Z., Golay A. Efficacy of therapeutic patient education in chronic diseases and obesity. Patient Educ. Couns. 2010;79:283–286. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.03.015.
    1. WHO . The Therapeutic Patient Education: Continuing Education Programmes for Health Care Providers in the Field of Prevention of Chronic Diseases. WHO; Copenhagen, Denmark: 1998.
    1. Sato F., Ishida T., Ohuchi N. The perioperative educational program for improving upper arm dysfunction in patients with breast cancer: A controlled trial. Tohoku J. Exp. Med. 2014;232:115–122. doi: 10.1620/tjem.232.115.
    1. Cumberland W.G., Berman B.A., Zazove P., Sadler G.R., Jo A., Booth H., Wolfson A., Stern C., Kaufman G., Bastani R. A Breast Cancer Education Program for D/deaf Women. Am. Ann. Deaf. 2018;163:90–115. doi: 10.1353/aad.2018.0014.
    1. De Groef A., Devoogdt N., Van der Gucht E., Dams L., Bernar K., Godderis L., Morlion B., Moloney N., Smeets A., Van Wilgen P., et al. EduCan trial: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial on the effectiveness of pain neuroscience education after breast cancer surgery on pain, physical, emotional and work-related functioning. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e025742. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025742.
    1. Prevost V., Heutte N., Leconte A., Licaj I., Delorme C., Clarisse B., Group E. Effectiveness of a therapeutic patient education program in improving cancer pain management: EFFADOL, a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial. BMC Cancer. 2019;19:673. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5836-5.
    1. Gagnayre R., Marchand C., Pinosa C., Brun M.F., Billot D., Iguemane J. Approche conceptuelle d’un dispositif d’évaluation pédagogique du patient. Pédagogie Médicale. 2006;7:31–42. doi: 10.1051/pmed:2006021.
    1. Blömeke S., Gustafsson J.-E., Shavelson R.J. Beyond dichotomies: Competence viewed as a continuum. Z. Psychol. 2015;223:3–13. doi: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000194.
    1. Lokhoff J., Wegewijs B., Durkin K., Wagenaar R., González Ferreras J.M., Isaacs A.K., dalle Rose L.G., Gobbi M. Tuning Educational Structures in Europe. Universidad de Deusto; Bilbao, Spain: 2010.
    1. Catley M.J., O’Connell N.E., Moseley G.L. How good is the neurophysiology of pain questionnaire? A Rasch analysis of psychometric properties. J. Pain. 2013;14:818–827. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2013.02.008.
    1. Demoulin C., Brasseur P., Roussel N., Brereton C., Humblet F., Flynn D., Van Beveren J., Osinsky T., Donneau A.-F., Crielaard J.-M., et al. Cross-cultural translation, validity, and reliability of the French version of the Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire. Physiother. Theory Pract. 2017;33:880–887. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2017.1359865.
    1. Nogueira L.A.C., Chaves A.d.O., Oliveira N., Almeida R.S.d., Reis F.J.J., Andrade F.G.d., Catley M.J. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Revised Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire into Brazilian Portuguese language. J. Bras. Psiquiatr. 2018;67:273–277. doi: 10.1590/0047-2085000000215.
    1. Richter M., Maurus B., Egan Moog M., Rauscher C., Regenspurger K., Delank K.S. German version of the Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire : Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity. Schmerz. 2019;33:244–252. doi: 10.1007/s00482-019-0366-2.
    1. Wild D., Grove A., Martin M., Eremenco S., McElroy S., Verjee-Lorenz A., Erikson P. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: Report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health J. Int. Soc. Pharm. Outcomes Res. 2005;8:94–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x.
    1. Nijs J., Wijma A.J., Leysen L., Pas R., Willaert W., Hoelen W., Ickmans K., Wilgen C.P.V. Explaining pain following cancer: A practical guide for clinicians. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 2019;23:367–377. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.12.003.
    1. Garcia Campayo J., Rodero B., Alda M., Sobradiel N., Montero J., Moreno S. [Validation of the Spanish version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale in fibromyalgia] Med. Clin. 2008;131:487–492.
    1. Terwee C.B., Bot S.D., de Boer M.R., van der Windt D.A., Knol D.L., Dekker J., Bouter L.M., de Vet H.C. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
    1. Bryant F.B., Yarnold P.R. Principal components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In: Grimm L.G., Yarnold R.R., editors. Reading and Understanding Multivariale Statistics. American Psychological Association; Washington, DC, USA: 1995. pp. 99–136.
    1. Mokkink L.B., Terwee C.B., Patrick D.L., Alonso J., Stratford P.W., Knol D.L., Bouter L.M., de Vet H.C. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: An international Delphi study. Qual. Life Res. 2010;19:539–549. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8.
    1. Davidson M., Keating J. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): How should I interpret reports of measurement properties? A practical guide for clinicians and researchers who are not biostatisticians. Br. J. Sports Med. 2014;48:792–796. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091704.
    1. Jho H.J., Myung S.K., Chang Y.J., Kim D.H., Ko D.H. Efficacy of pain education in cancer patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Supportive Care Cancer. 2013;21:1963–1971. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1756-0.
    1. Louw A., Zimney K., Puentedura E.J., Diener I. The efficacy of pain neuroscience education on musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review of the literature. Physiother. Theory Pract. 2016;32:332–355. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2016.1194646.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; Hillsdale, MI, USA: 1988.
    1. Sánchez-Sánchez B., Arranz-Martín B., Navarro-Brazález B., Vergara-Pérez F., Bailón-Cerezo J., Torres-Lacomba M. How Do We Assess Patient Skills in a Competence-Based Program? Assessment of Patient Competences Using the Spanish Version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire and Real Practical Cases in Women with Pelvic Floor Disorders. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18:2377. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18052377.
    1. Baartman L.K.J., Prins F.J., Kirschner P.A., van der Vleuten C.P.M. Determining the quality of competence assessment programs: A self-evaluation procedure. Stud. Educ. Eval. 2007;33:258–281. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.07.004.
    1. Baartman L.K.J., Bastiaens T.J., Kirschner P.A., van der Vleuten C.P.M. Evaluating assessment quality in competence-based education: A qualitative comparison of two frameworks. Educ. Res. Rev. 2007;2:114–129. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2007.06.001.
    1. Janssen-Noordman A.M., Merriënboer J.J., van der Vleuten C.P., Scherpbier A.J. Design of integrated practice for learning professional competences. Med Teach. 2006;28:447–452. doi: 10.1080/01421590600825276.
    1. Van der Vleuten C.P., Schuwirth L.W. Assessing professional competence: From methods to programmes. Med Educ. 2005;39:309–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02094.x.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever