ASSESSMENT OF NAUSEA

被引:50
作者
DELFAVERO, A
ROILA, F
BASURTO, C
MINOTTI, V
BALLATORI, E
PATOIA, L
TONATO, M
TOGNONI, G
机构
[1] UNIV PERUGIA,IST CLIN MED 1,I-06100 PERUGIA,ITALY
[2] OSPED POLICLIN,DIV ONCOL MED,PERUGIA,ITALY
[3] UNIV PERUGIA,DIPARTIMENTO SCI STAT,I-06100 PERUGIA,ITALY
[4] MARIO NEGRI INST PHARMACOL RES,I-20157 MILAN,ITALY
关键词
cancer patients; chemotherapy; nausea; nausea assessment;
D O I
10.1007/BF00265968
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
In a standardized way three different methods of measuring nausea have been assessed in 849 patients enrolled in 4 double blind, randomized, clinical trials, and 2 observational studies. Nausea was measured before and 2, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours after cancer chemotherapy by using a discrete scale (DS), a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a continuous chromatic analogue scale (ACCS), and it was evaluated according to 4 different dimensions: maximal intensity (MI) entity (E) duration (D) and quantity (Q). The distributions of nausea measurements in the population, agreement between the scales and their sensitivity, and agreement between dimensions and their sensitivity were analyzed. A uniform distribution of nausea measurements was found only in patients receiving chemotherapy without any antiemetic treatment. There was substantial equivalence of the different scales, and no advantage was shown an using an analogue (VAS) than a discrete (DS) scale. A trend toward increasing sensitivity in detecting differences as the dimensions of nausea considered became more inclusive of the various aspects of this symptom (Q more sensible than E more sensible than MI) was observed. © 1990 Springer-Verlag.
引用
收藏
页码:115 / 120
页数:6
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   MEASUREMENT IN MEDICINE - THE ANALYSIS OF METHOD COMPARISON STUDIES [J].
ALTMAN, DG ;
BLAND, JM .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES D-THE STATISTICIAN, 1983, 32 (03) :307-317
[2]   LORAZEPAM - A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, CROSSOVER STUDY OF A NEW ANTIEMETIC IN PATIENTS RECEIVING CYTO-TOXIC CHEMOTHERAPY AND PROCHLORPERAZINE [J].
BISHOP, JF ;
OLVER, IN ;
WOLF, MM ;
MATTHEWS, JP ;
LONG, M ;
BINGHAM, J ;
HILLCOAT, BL ;
COOPER, IA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1984, 2 (06) :691-695
[3]  
GROSSI E, 1983, CLIN EXP RHEUMATOL, V1, P337
[4]  
LAZLO J, 1983, ANTIEMETICS CANCER C
[5]   REASSESSMENT OF VERBAL AND VISUAL ANALOG RATINGS IN ANALGESIC STUDIES [J].
LITTMAN, GS ;
WALKER, BR ;
SCHNEIDER, BE .
CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 1985, 38 (01) :16-23
[6]  
MORROW GR, 1984, CANCER, V53, P2267
[7]   METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS IN MEASUREMENT OF PAIN - COMPARISON BETWEEN VERBAL RATING SCALE AND VISUAL ANALOG SCALE [J].
OHNHAUS, EE ;
ADLER, R .
PAIN, 1975, 1 (04) :379-384
[8]  
OLVER IN, 1986, CANCER TREAT REP, V70, P555
[9]  
ROILA F, 1985, CANCER TREAT REP, V69, P1353
[10]   DOUBLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL OF THE ANTIEMETIC EFFICACY AND TOXICITY OF METHYLPREDNISOLONE (MP), METOCLOPRAMIDE (MTC) AND DOMPERIDONE (DMP) IN BREAST-CANCER PATIENTS TREATED WITH IV CMF [J].
ROILA, F ;
TONATO, M ;
BASURTO, C ;
MINOTTI, V ;
BALLATORI, E ;
DELFAVERO, A .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER & CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1987, 23 (06) :615-617