Quality of Life Research

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 265–274 | Cite as

Measurement of quality of life in women with breast cancer. Development of a Life Satisfaction Questionnaire (LSQ-32) and a comparison with the EORTC QLQ-C30

  • M. Carlsson
  • E. Hamrin
Research Papers

Abstract

The purpose was to develop and validate a new instrument suitable for measuring perceived quality of life in women with breast cancer. The instrument is to be used within conventional cancer therapy as well as in complementary care, and is called the LSQ-32 (Life Satisfaction Questionnaire). The subjects were 362 women with breast cancer in all cancer stages. Cronbach's α reliability coefficient of the LSQ was 0.89. The construct validity was estimated by a principal component analysis. Six orthogonal factors were identified: (1) ‘Quality of family relation’, (2) ‘Physical symptoms’, (3) ‘Socioeconomic situation’, (4) ‘Quality of daily activities’, (5) ‘Sickness impact’ and (6) ‘Quality of close friend relation’. The criterion-related validity was estimated by comparing the LSQ-32 and the EORTC QLQ-C30. The scales/items of the EORTC QLQ-C30 were represented in the LSQ-32, but the factors ‘Quality of family relation’ and ‘Quality of close friend relation’ were not found in the EORTC QLQ-C30. It was concluded that the LSQ-32 as well as the EORTC QLQ-C30 are valuable tools in the measurement of quality of life in women with breast cancer. The LSQ-32, however, also contains an existential factor.

Key words

Breast cancer psychometry quality of life QOL-assessment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson RT, Aaronson NK, Wilkin D. Critical review of the international assessments of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res, 1993; 2: 369–395.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagenal FS, Easton DF, Harris E, Chilvers CD, McElwain TJ. Survival of patients with breast cancer attending Bristol Cancer Help Centre. Lancet 1990; 8: 606–610.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hamrin E, Carlsson M, Haglund L, Nygren U. Prövning av olika metoder att utvärdera verksamheten vid Vidarkliniken i Järna. Omvårdnadsforskning vid Hälsouniversitetet i Linköping 1990; 1 (In Swedish)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carlsson M, Hamrin E. Psychological and psychosocial aspects of breast cancer and breast cancer treatment. Cancer Nursing 1994; 17(5): 418–428.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spitzer WO, Dobson AJ, Hall J, Chesterman E Levi J, Shepherd R, Battista R, Catchlove BR. Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients. J Chron Dis 1981; 34: 585–597.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schipper H, Clinch J, McMurray A, Levitt M. Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: The Functional Living Index—Cancer: Development and validation. J Clin Oncol 1984; 2(5): 472–483.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cosgarelli-Schag C, Heinrich L, Ganz P. Cancer Inventory of Problem Situation: An instrument for assessing cancer patients rehabilitation needs. J Psychosocial Onco 1983; 1(4): 11–24.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coscarelli-Schag CA, Heinrich RL. Development of a comprehensive quality of life measurement tool: CARES. Oncology 1990; 4: 135–138.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bullinger M, et al. for the EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life. The EORTC core of quality of life questionnaire: Interim results of an international field study. In: Osoba D (Ed) Effect of Cancer on Quality of Life. Boca Raton, Boston, Ann Arbor, London: CRC Press Inc, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bullinger M, et al. for the EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQC-30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Nat Cancer Inst 1993; 85(5): 365–375.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sullivan M. Livskvalitetsmätning. Nytt generell och tumörspecifikt formulär för utvärdering och planering. Läkartidningen 1994; 91(13): 1340–1342. (In Swedish)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Padilla GD, Ferrell B, Grant M, Rhiner M. Defining the content domain of quality of life for cancer patients with pain. Cancer Nursing 1990; 13(2): 108–115.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferrans CE. Development of a quality of life index for patients with cancer. Oncol Nursing Forum 1990; 17(Suppl): 15–21.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Cartner WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: Development and Final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981; 19(8): 787–805.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pincus T, Summey J, Soraci AS, Wallstone KA, Hummon NP. Assessment of patient satisfaction in activities of daily living using a modified Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum 1983; 26(11): 1346–1353.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kajandi M. Livskvalitet: definition, reliabilitet samt tillämpning på ett psykiatriskt material Scand J Behav Ther 1988; Suppl 8: 63–73. (In Swedish)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hörnquist JO. Quality of life: Concept and assessment. Scand J Soc Med 1989; 18: 69–79, 1989Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of test. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297–334.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knapp T. Focus on Psychometrics. Coefficient alpha: Conceptualizations and anomalies. Res Nurs Health 1991; 14: 457–460.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gorsuch R. Factor Analysis. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 1983.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Niezgoda HE, Pater JL. A validation study of the domains of the core EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 319–325.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Osoba D, Zee B, Pater J, Warr D, Kaizer L, Latreille J. Psychometric properties and responsiveness of the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in patients with breast, ovarian and lung cancer. Qual Life Res 1994; 3: 353–364.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Likert R. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. New York: Archives of Psychology, 1932.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nordenskjöld B, Dufmats M. Cancer i Sydöstra Sverige 1992. Onkologiskt Centrum. Sydöstra Sjukvårdsregionen. 1995 (In Swedish)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    UICC. 4th revised edition for TNM classification, 1987.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Haycock K, Roth J, Gagnon J, Finzer W, Soper C, Sager S, Rocco T, Bauer L. StatView: The Ultimate Integrated Data Analysis & Presentation System. ABACUS Concepts, Inc. Berkeley, CA. 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Rapid Science Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Carlsson
    • 1
  • E. Hamrin
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Caring SciencesUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Caring SciencesFaculty of Health SciencesLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations