Cargando…

Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to expand the international psychometric validation of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool for Patients and Families (CCAT-PF) within a sample of Australian cancer patients. METHODS: Survey data from 181 cancer patient-caregiver dyads ≥ 18 years of age w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Michael, Natasha, Gorelik, Alex, Georgousopoulou, Ekavi, Sulistio, Merlina, Tee, Patrick, Hauser, Katherine, Kissane, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9385757/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35612665
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07163-7
_version_ 1784769658366197760
author Michael, Natasha
Gorelik, Alex
Georgousopoulou, Ekavi
Sulistio, Merlina
Tee, Patrick
Hauser, Katherine
Kissane, David
author_facet Michael, Natasha
Gorelik, Alex
Georgousopoulou, Ekavi
Sulistio, Merlina
Tee, Patrick
Hauser, Katherine
Kissane, David
author_sort Michael, Natasha
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to expand the international psychometric validation of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool for Patients and Families (CCAT-PF) within a sample of Australian cancer patients. METHODS: Survey data from 181 cancer patient-caregiver dyads ≥ 18 years of age with solid or haematological cancers were analysed (85.4% response rate). Spearman’s rho was used to examine the correlation between CCAT-P and CCAT-F scores and weighted kappa the agreement between them. Exploratory factor analysis using scree plot and Kaiser-Guttman criteria was conducted to evaluate the scale structure. Cronbach’s α and Pearson correlation coefficients were used to measure internal consistency and concurrent validity respectively. RESULTS: Mean scores were the following: CCAT-P 46.2 (9.8), CCAT-F 45.7 (9.4), and CCAT-PF 24.1 (8.0). We confirmed the poor concordance between patient and caregiver reporting of items in the CCAT-PF, with all but two items having weighted kappa values < 0.20 and Spearman’s rho < 0.19. We derived a three-factor solution, disclosure, limitation of treatment, and treatment decision making, with reliability ranging from Cronbach’s α = 0.43–0.53. The CCAT-P and CCAT-F showed strong correlations with preparation for decision-making (CCAT-P: r = 0.0.92; CCATF: r = 0.0.93) but were weakly associated with patient/caregiver distress related with having difficult conversations on future care planning. CONCLUSION: Preliminary validation of the CCAT-PF in the Australian setting has shown some similar psychometric properties to previously published studies, further supporting its potential utility as a tool to assess patient-caregiver dyadic communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620001035910 12/10/2020 retrospectively registered. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07163-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9385757
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93857572022-08-19 Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample Michael, Natasha Gorelik, Alex Georgousopoulou, Ekavi Sulistio, Merlina Tee, Patrick Hauser, Katherine Kissane, David Support Care Cancer Original Article PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to expand the international psychometric validation of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool for Patients and Families (CCAT-PF) within a sample of Australian cancer patients. METHODS: Survey data from 181 cancer patient-caregiver dyads ≥ 18 years of age with solid or haematological cancers were analysed (85.4% response rate). Spearman’s rho was used to examine the correlation between CCAT-P and CCAT-F scores and weighted kappa the agreement between them. Exploratory factor analysis using scree plot and Kaiser-Guttman criteria was conducted to evaluate the scale structure. Cronbach’s α and Pearson correlation coefficients were used to measure internal consistency and concurrent validity respectively. RESULTS: Mean scores were the following: CCAT-P 46.2 (9.8), CCAT-F 45.7 (9.4), and CCAT-PF 24.1 (8.0). We confirmed the poor concordance between patient and caregiver reporting of items in the CCAT-PF, with all but two items having weighted kappa values < 0.20 and Spearman’s rho < 0.19. We derived a three-factor solution, disclosure, limitation of treatment, and treatment decision making, with reliability ranging from Cronbach’s α = 0.43–0.53. The CCAT-P and CCAT-F showed strong correlations with preparation for decision-making (CCAT-P: r = 0.0.92; CCATF: r = 0.0.93) but were weakly associated with patient/caregiver distress related with having difficult conversations on future care planning. CONCLUSION: Preliminary validation of the CCAT-PF in the Australian setting has shown some similar psychometric properties to previously published studies, further supporting its potential utility as a tool to assess patient-caregiver dyadic communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620001035910 12/10/2020 retrospectively registered. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07163-7. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-05-25 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9385757/ /pubmed/35612665 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07163-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Michael, Natasha
Gorelik, Alex
Georgousopoulou, Ekavi
Sulistio, Merlina
Tee, Patrick
Hauser, Katherine
Kissane, David
Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample
title Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample
title_full Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample
title_fullStr Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample
title_full_unstemmed Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample
title_short Patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the Cancer Communication Assessment Tool in an Australian sample
title_sort patient-caregiver communication concordance in cancer—refinement of the cancer communication assessment tool in an australian sample
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9385757/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35612665
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07163-7
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelnatasha patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample
AT gorelikalex patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample
AT georgousopoulouekavi patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample
AT sulistiomerlina patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample
AT teepatrick patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample
AT hauserkatherine patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample
AT kissanedavid patientcaregivercommunicationconcordanceincancerrefinementofthecancercommunicationassessmenttoolinanaustraliansample