Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validation of the Portuguese version of Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) in Brazilian cancer patients

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

Abstract

Goals of work

The purpose of this study was to validate the Portuguese version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) in order to establish its assessment properties, including validity and reliability in a sample of Brazilian cancer patients.

Materials and methods

Two hundred seventy patients with different types of cancer were included for this study; the mean age was 50.5 years. The reliability was assessed by internal consistency and reproducibility. Construct validity was assessed through convergent validity and discriminant validity. Convergent validity was examined by comparing the FACT-F to the SF-36. Discriminant validity of the FACT-F evaluated the ability of the scale to differentiate defined groups, discriminating patients according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status and different stages of disease.

Main results

FACT-F had high internal consistency (Cronbach α coefficient was 0.78 for physical well-being, 0.68 for social/family well-being, 0.75 for emotional well-being, 0.74 for functional well-being, 0.91 for fatigue, and 0.92 for total FACT-F). The range of test–retest intraclass correlation was from 0.72 to 0.91 (p < 0.0001). The Pearson product correlation revealed good correlations between the total FACT-F and subscales of the SF-36 in most dimensions, ranging from r = 0.51 to r = 0.76, except for SF-36 physical (r = 0.31). The positive correlations between the SF-36 vitality scale and FACT-F total (r = 0.76) and the fatigue subscale (r = 0.77) support the convergent validity.

Conclusions

The Portuguese version of FACT-F is a reliable and valid instrument to assess quality of life and fatigue, representing a valid tool to screen cancer-related fatigue in Brazilian cancer patients.

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

References

  1. Winningham ML, Nail LM, Burke MB et al (1994) Fatigue and the cancer experience: the state of the knowledge. Oncol Nurs Forum 21(1):23–36

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yamagishi A, Morita T, Miyashita M, Kimura F (2008) Symptom prevalence and longitudinal follow-up in cancer outpatients receiving chemotherapy. J Pain Symptom Manage. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2008.04.015

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mota DD, Pimenta CA, Piper BF (2008) Fatigue in Brazilian cancer patients, caregivers, and nursing students: a psychometric validation study of the Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised. Support Care Cancer. doi:10.1007/s00520-008-0518-x

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Curt GGA, GA BW et al (2000) Impact of cancer­related fatigue on the lives of patients: new findings from the Fatigue Coalition. Oncologist 5:353–360

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bennett B, Goldstein D, Lloyd A et al (2004) Fatigue and psychological distress—exploring the relationship in women treated for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 40:1689–1695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Romito F, Montanaro R, Corvasce C et al (2008) Is cancer-related fatigue more strongly correlated to haematological or to psychological factors in cancer patients? Support Care Cancer 16(8):943–946

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Haghighat S, Akbari ME, Holakouei K et al (2003) Factors predicting fatigue in breast cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 11(8):533–538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jacobsen PB, Hann DM, Azzarello LM et al (1999) Fatigue in women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: characteristics, course, and correlate. J Pain Symptom Manage 18(4):233–242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Berger AM, VonEssen S, Kuhn BR et al (2003) Adherence, sleep, and fatigue outcomes after adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy: results of a feasibility intervention study. Oncol Nurs Forum 30(3):513–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Minton O, Stone P (2008) A systematic review of the scales used for the measurement of cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Ann Oncol. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdn537

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 

  12. Lent L, Hahn E, Vehemence S et al (1999) Using cross-cultural input to adapt the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) scales. Acta Oncol 38(6):695–702

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Webster K, Cella D, Yost K (2003) The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system: properties, applications, and interpretation. Health Quality Life Outcomes 1:79. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Webster K, Odom L, Peterman A et al (1999) The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system: validation of version 4 of the core questionnaire. Qual Life Res 8(7):604

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G et al (1993) The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 11(3):570–579

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yellen SB, Cella DF, Webster K et al (1997) Measuring fatigue and other anemia-related symptoms with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) measurement system. J Pain Symptom Manage 13(2):63–74

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cella D, Lai JS, Chang CH, Peterman A, Slavin M (2002) Fatigue in cancer patients compared with fatigue in the general United States population. Cancer 94:528–538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cella D, Yount S, Sorensen M, Chartash E, Sengupta N, Grober J (2005) Validation of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy fatigue scale relative to other instrumentation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 32:811–819

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chandran V, Bhella S, Schentag C, Gladman DD (2007) Functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-fatigue scale is valid in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 66(7):936–939

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cella D (1997) The FACT-anemia scale. A new tool for the assessment of outcomes in cancer anemia and fatigue. Semin Hematol 34(3):13–19

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ (2005) A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof 28(2):212–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Arnold BJ, Eremenco E, Chang CH et al (2000) Development of a single Portuguese language version of the functional assessment of cancer therapy general (FACT G) scale. Qual Life Res 9(3):316

    Google Scholar 

  23. Arnold BJ, Eremenco E, Chang CH et al (2001) How much is “very much”? Developing a rating scale for Portuguese speaking countries. Qual Life Res 10(3):2644

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) I: conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30(6):473–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Raczek AE (1993) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) II: psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 31(3):247–263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ciconelli RM, Ferraz MB, Santos W et al (1999) Tradução para a língua portuguesa e validação do questionário genérico de avaliação de qualidade de vida SF-36 (Brasil SF-36). Rev Bras Reumatol 39(3):143–150

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zubrod CG, Schneiderman M, Frei E III et al (1960) Appraisal of methods for the study of chemotherapy of cancer in man: comparative therapeutic trial of nitrogen mustard and thiophosphoramide. J Chronic Dis 11:7–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mundfrom DJ, Shaw DG, Ke TL (2005) Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. International Journal Testing 5:159–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hopkins WG (2000) Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med 30(1):1–15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Atkinson G, Nevill A (2000) Typical error versus limits of agreement. Sports Med 30(5):375–381

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16(3):297–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Nunnally JM, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF (2003) A comparison of two time intervals for test–retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 56:730–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dapueto JJ, Francolino C, Servente L, Chang CH, Gotta I, Levin R, Abreu MC (2003) Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Spanish version 4 in South America: classic psychometric and item response theory analyses. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:32. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yoshimura A, Kobayashi K, Fumimoto H et al (2004) Cross-cultural validation of the Japanese Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An). J Nippon Med Sch 71(5):314–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Aaronson N, Alonso J, Burnam A, Lohr KN, Patrick DL, Perrin E, Stein REK, Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust (2002) Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11:193–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cella D, Nowinski CJ (2002) Measuring quality of life in chronic illness: the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy measurement system. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83(Suppl 2):s10–s17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Overcash J, Extermann M, Parr J et al (2001) Validity and reliability of the FACT-G scale for use in the older person with cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 24(6):591–596

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Smets E, Garssen B, Bonke B, Haes JD (1995) The multidimensional fatigue inventory: psychometric qualities of an instrument to assess fatigue. J Psychosom Res 39:315–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Schwartz A, Meek P (1999) Additional construct validity of the Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale. J Nurs Meas 7(1):35–45

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Mr. Ben Arnold and Ms. Helen Morrow for permission to use the instrument FACT-F in this study and for having provided the questionnaire in Portuguese language. We also thank Mrs. Sirlei Siani Morais for help in statistical review. Finally, we are grateful to all patients who participated in the study.

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest

Authors wish to disclose the absence of financial support and indicated no potential conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Physical Therapy Department, Brazilian National Cancer Institute-INCA, Rua do Rezende, 128, Centro-Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 20231-092, Brazil

    Neli Muraki Ishikawa

  2. Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro-UNIRIO, Rua Mariz e Barros, 775, Maracanã-Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 20270-004, Brazil

    Luiz Claudio Santos Thuler

  3. Hospital of Cancer II, Brazilian National Cancer Institute-INCA, Rua Equador, 831, Santo Cristo-Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 20220-410, Brazil

    Alessandra Grasso Giglio

  4. Clinical Oncology Department, Brazilian National Cancer Institute-INCA, Praça da Cruz Vermelha, n°23, Centro-Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 20230-130, Brazil

    Clarissa Seródio da Rocha Baldotto & Carlos José Coelho de Andrade

  5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Campinas State University, Rua Antônio Hossri, 629 Cidade Universitária, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-370, Brazil

    Sophie Françoise Mauricette Derchain

Authors
  1. Neli Muraki Ishikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luiz Claudio Santos Thuler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessandra Grasso Giglio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Clarissa Seródio da Rocha Baldotto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carlos José Coelho de Andrade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sophie Françoise Mauricette Derchain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neli Muraki Ishikawa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ishikawa, N.M., Thuler, L.C.S., Giglio, A.G. et al. Validation of the Portuguese version of Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) in Brazilian cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 18, 481–490 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0697-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0697-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation