Cargando…

Psychometric properties of the FACT-G quality of life scale for family caregivers of cancer patients

PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine psychometric properties of a caregiver version of the well-established Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Scale (FACT-G) after conducting focus groups and obtaining expert input. METHODS: We made minor wording modifications to the Patient FACT-G to e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Song, Lixin, Tan, Xianming, Bredle, Jason, Bennett, Antonia V., Northouse, Laurel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7363734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32246432
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02477-7
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine psychometric properties of a caregiver version of the well-established Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Scale (FACT-G) after conducting focus groups and obtaining expert input. METHODS: We made minor wording modifications to the Patient FACT-G to enable caregivers to report how the illness affected their overall quality of life (QOL) and well-being on four subscales (physical, social, emotional, functional). We tested the acceptability, precision, factor structure, reliability and validity of the Caregiver FACT-G among partners of prostate cancer patients (N = 263) and caregivers (spouses, siblings, adult children) of patients with advanced cancer (breast, lung, colorectal, prostate) (N = 484) using data from two Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs). RESULTS: With a factor structure similar to the Patient FACT-G, Caregiver FACT-G was acceptable and precise in measuring caregiver QOL, with high inter-factor correlations and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alphas 0.81–0.91). The Caregiver FACT-G had strong convergent validity demonstrated by significant positive correlations with caregiver self-efficacy (0.25–0.63), dyadic communication (0.18–0.51), and social support (0.18–0.54) in both samples. It also had strong discriminant validity evidenced by significant inverse correlations with negative appraisal of caregiving (− 0.37 to − 0.69), uncertainty (− 0.28 to − 0.53), hopelessness (− 0.25 to − 0.60), and avoidant coping (− 0.26 to − 0.58) in both samples. Caregivers’ baseline FACT-G scores were significantly associated with their physical (0.23) and mental well-being (0.54; 4-month follow-up) and their depression (− 0.69; 3-month follow-up), indicating strong predictive validity. CONCLUSION: This is the first study evaluating the psychometric properties of the Caregiver FACT-G. More psychometric testing is warranted, especially among caregivers of diverse sociocultural backgrounds.