Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Fatigue in Brazilian cancer patients, caregivers, and nursing students: a psychometric validation study of the Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Goals of work

The objective of this study was to validate the Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised (PFS-R) for use in Brazilian culture.

Patients and methods

Translation of the PFS-R into Portuguese and validity and reliability tests were performed. Convenience samples in Brazil we as follows: 584 cancer patients (mean age 57 ± 13 years; 51.3% female); 184 caregivers (mean age 50 ± 12.7 years; 65.8% female); and 189 undergraduate nursing students (mean age 21.6 ± 2.8 years; 96.2% female); Instruments used were as follows: Brazilian PFS, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS).

Main results

The 22 items of the Brazilian PFS loaded well (factor loading > 0.35) on three dimensions identified by factor analysis (behavioral, affective, and sensorial–psychological). These dimensions explained 65% of the variance. Internal consistency reliability was very good (Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.841 to 0.943 for the total scale and its dimensions). Cancer patients and their caregivers completed the Brazilian PFS twice for test–retest reliability and results showed good stability (Pearson’s r ≥ 0,60, p < 0,001). Correlations among the Brazilian PFS and other scales were significant, in hypothesized directions, and mostly moderate contributing to divergent (Brazilian PFS × KPS) and convergent validity (Brazilian PFS × BDI). Mild, moderate, and severe fatigue in patients were reported by 73 (12.5%), 167 (28.6%), and 83 (14.2%), respectively. Surprisingly, students had the highest mean total fatigue scores; no significant differences were observed between patients and caregivers showing poor discriminant validity.

Conclusions

While the Brazilian PFS is a reliable and valid instrument to measure fatigue in Brazilian cancer patients, further work is needed to evaluate the discriminant validity of the scale in Brazil.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Personal communication, November 26, 2007 Dr. Barbara F. Piper.

References

  1. Breitbart W, Rosenfeld B, Kaim M, Funesti-Esch J (2001) A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of psychostimulants for the treatment of fatigue in ambulatory patients with human immunodeficiency virus disease. Arch Intern Med 161(3):411–420

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cho HJ, Costa E, Menezes PR, Chalder T, Bhugra D, Wessely S (2007) Cross-cultural validation of the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire in Brazilian primary care. J Psychosom Res 62(3):301–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Clark PC, Ashford S, Burt R, Aycock DM, Kimble LP (2006) Factor analysis of the revised piper fatigue scale in a caregiver sample. J Nurs Measure 14(2):71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dagnelie PC, Pijls-Johannesma MCG, Pijpe A, Boumans BJE, Skrabanja ATP, Lambin P, Kempen GIJM (2006) Psychometric properties of the revised Piper Fatigue Scale in Dutch cancer patients were satisfactory. J Clin Epidemiol 59:642–649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gledhill JA, Rodary C, Mahé C, Laizet C (2002) Validation française de l’échelle de fatigue révisée de Piper [French validation of the revised Piper Fatigue Scale]. Rech Soins Infirm 68:50–65

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gorenstein C, Andrade L (1996) Validation of a Portuguese version of the Beck Depression Inventory and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory in Brazilian subjects. Braz J Med Biol Res 29:453–457

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Karnofsky DA, Burchenal JH (1949) The clinical evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents. In: MacLeod CM (ed) Evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents. Columbia Univ Press, New York, p 196

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kerlinger FN (1986) Foundations of behavioral research, 3rd edn. Holt, Rinehard and Winston, New York, p 415

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lavdaniti M, Patiraki E, Dafni U, Katapodi M, Papathanasoglou E, Sotiropoulou A (2006) Prospective assessment of fatigue and health status in Greek patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy. Oncol Nurs Forum 33(3):603–610

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mota DDCF, Pimenta CAM, Fitch MI (2007) Fatigue pictogram: an easy to use self-report instrument to assess fatigue in oncology clinical practice. In: 20th International Symposium Supportive Care in Cancer, 2007, St. Gallen. Supportive Care in Cancer. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, vol. 15, pp 708–709

  12. Mota DDCF, Pimenta CAM (2006) Self-report instruments for fatigue assessment: a systematic review. Research and Theory for Nursing Practice 20:49–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nunnaly JC, Bernstein I (1994) Psychometric theory (3rd ed.) McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Okuyama T, Akechi T, Kuhaya A, Okamura H, Shima Y, Maruguchi M et al (2000) Development and validation of the Cancer Fatigue Scale: a brief, three-dimensional, self-rating scale for assessment of fatigue in cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage 19:5–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ostlund U, Gustavsson P, Furst CJ (2007) Translation and cultural adaptation of the Piper Fatigue Scale for use in Sweden. Eu J Oncol Nurs 11:133–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Piper BF, Dibble SL, Dodd MJ, Weiss MC (1998) Slaughter RE. Paul SM. The revised Piper Fatigue Scale: psychometric evaluation in women with breast cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 25(4):677–684

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Piper BF, Lindsey AM, Dodd MJ, Ferketich S, Paul SM, Weller S (1989) The development of an instrument to measure the subjective dimension of fatigue. In: Funk SG, Tornquist EM, Champagne MT, Copp LA, Wiese RA (eds) Key aspects of comfort: management of pain, fatigue and nausea. Springer, New York, pp 199–208

    Google Scholar 

  18. So WKW, Dogson J, Tai JWM (2003) Fatigue and quality of life among Chinese patients with hematologic malignancy after bone marrow transplantation. Cancer Nurs 26(3):211–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Stone P, Hardy J, Broadly K, Tookman AJ, Kurowska A, A’Hern R (1999) Fatigue in advanced cancer: a prospective controlled cross-sectional study. Br J Cancer 79(9/10):1479–1486

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Strohschein FJ, Kelly CG, Clarke AG, Westbury CF, Shuaib A, Chan KM (2003) Applicability, validity, and reliability of the Piper Fatigue Scale in postpolio patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 82(2):122–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schwartz CE, Bode R, Repucci N, Becker J, Sprangers MA, Fayers PM (2006) The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: a meta-analysis of response shift. Qual Life Res 15(9):1533–1550

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) for the doctorate scholarship and to The State of Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) for financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sao Paulo Cancer Institute (Brazil), Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 251, 5° andar, São Paulo, São Paulo, 01246-000, Brazil

    Dálete D. C. F. Mota

  2. Sao Paulo University, School of Nursing, Av Dr Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 419, São Paulo, São Paulo, 05403-000, Brazil

    Cibele A. M. Pimenta

  3. Scottsdale Healthcare/University of Arizona, 10460 N. 92nd Street, Suite 206, Scottsdale, AZ, 85258, USA

    Barbara F. Piper

  4. Rua Três de Maio, n. 130, apt. 82, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, São Paulo, 04044-020, Brazil

    Dálete D. C. F. Mota

Authors
  1. Dálete D. C. F. Mota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cibele A. M. Pimenta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Barbara F. Piper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dálete D. C. F. Mota.

Additional information

This study was part of the doctorate project developed by Dalete Mota at the School of Nursing of São Paulo University (Brazil) entitled “Fatigue in colorectal cancer patients: risk and predictive factors.”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mota, D.D.C.F., Pimenta, C.A.M. & Piper, B.F. Fatigue in Brazilian cancer patients, caregivers, and nursing students: a psychometric validation study of the Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised. Support Care Cancer 17, 645–652 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-008-0518-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-008-0518-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation