Validation of the simplified Chinese version of the FACT-B for measuring quality of life for patients with breast cancer

  • Chonghua Wan
  • Dongmei Zhang
  • Zheng Yang
  • Xin Tu
  • Wan Tang
  • Changyong Feng
  • Hongyue Wang
  • Xueliang Tang
Clinical Trial

Abstract

The simplified Chinese version of the FACT-B was evaluated by QOL data measured from 376 patients with breast cancer. The results showed that test–retest reliability for five domains: physical well-being, social/family well-being, emotional well-being, functional well-being, additional concerns, and the overall scales and trial outcome index were 0.82, 0.85, 0.91, 0.86, 0.90, 0.84 and 0.91, 0.89 respectively. The internal consistency α for the five domains mentioned above were 0.85, 0.82, 0.84, 0.84 and 0.59 respectively. Correlation analysis, factor analysis and structural equation model showed good construct validity. Criterion-related validity was also confirmed using QLICP-BR as a criterion. The instrument can find the change of QOL for cancer patients after treatment. It’s concluded that the simplified Chinese version of FACT-B can be used to measure QOL for Chinese patients with breast cancer with good validity, reliability and responsiveness.

Keywords

Breast cancer FACT-B QLICP-BR Quality of life Instrument Structural equation model 

References

  1. 1.
    Overmoyer BA (1995) Chemotherapeutic palliative approaches in the treatment of breast cancer. Semi Oncol 22 (2 Suppl 3):2–9Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ferrell Br, Grant M, Funk B et al. (1996) Quality of life in breast cancer. Cancer Pract 4(6):331–340PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Selby PJ, Champon JA, Etazadi-Amoli J et al. (1984) The development of a method for assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. Br J Cancer 50(1):13–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brade MJ, Cella DF, Mo F et al. (1997) Reliability and validity of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-Breast quality-of- life instrument. J Clinic Oncol 15(3):974–986Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G et al. (1993) The functional assessment of cancer therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clinic Oncol 11(3):570–579Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aaronson NK, Cull A, Kaasa S et al. (1994) The European organization for research and treatment of cancer (EORTC) modular approach to quality of life assessment in oncology. Int J Ment Health 23(2):75–96Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sprangers MA (1996) The european organization for research and treatment of cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol 14(10):2756–2768PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu LT, Bentler P (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling 6:1–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Browne MW, Cudeck R (1992) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS (eds), Testing structural equation models. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA pp 136–162Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van der Steeg AFW, De Vries J, Roukema JA (2004) Quality of life and health status in breast carcinoma. EJSO 30:1051–1057PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yoo HJ, Ahn SH, Eremenco S et al. (2005) Korean translation and validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-breast (FACT-B) scale version 4. Quality Life Res 14(6):1627–1632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pandey M, Thomas BC, Ramdas K et al. (2002). Quality of life in breast cancer patients: validation of a FACT-B Malayalam version. Quality Life Res 11(2):87–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chonghua Wan
    • 1
    • 5
  • Dongmei Zhang
    • 2
  • Zheng Yang
    • 1
  • Xin Tu
    • 3
  • Wan Tang
    • 3
  • Changyong Feng
    • 3
  • Hongyue Wang
    • 3
  • Xueliang Tang
    • 4
  1. 1.Faculty of Public HealthKunming Medical CollegeKunmingChina
  2. 2.Department of ManagementGuangdong Pharmacy CollegeGuangzhouChina
  3. 3.Department of Biostatistics and Computational BiologyUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA
  4. 4.Oncological Hospital of Yunnan ProvinceKunmingChina
  5. 5.Dept. of Biostatistics and Computational BiologyUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations