Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW): An individualised questionnaire for evaluating outcome in cancer support care that includes complementary therapies

被引:104
作者
Paterson, Charlotte
Thomas, Kate
Manasse, Andrew
Cooke, Helen
Peace, Gillian
机构
[1] Univ Bristol, MRC Hlth Serv Res Collaborat, Dept Social Med, Bristol BS8 2PR, Avon, England
[2] Univ Sheffield, Med Care Res Unit, Sheffield S10 2TN, S Yorkshire, England
[3] Cavendish Ctr, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[4] Bristol Canc Help Ctr, Bristol, Avon, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.ctim.2006.03.006
中图分类号
R [医药、卫生];
学科分类号
10 ;
摘要
Background and aim: Descriptive and experimental evaluations of cancer support services require an outcome questionnaire that is valid, responsive to change, feasible and interpretable. This paper describes the development of such a tool. Development of the questionnaire: A validated individualised measure MYMOP was adapted and piloted in two centres, and a multidisciplinary research team used this experience to develop the new questionnaire, Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW). MYCaW requires participants to nominate one or two concerns and, using a seven-point scale, to score these concerns and their general feeling of wellbeing. The follow-up questionnaire also includes the open question 'Reflecting on your time with this Centre, what were the most important aspects for you?' Investigating validity: During 2003 the two centres administered MYCaW to all new patients, before and after a course of treatment. Patients nominated concerns that spanned physical, emotional and psychosocial concerns. For patients completing follow-up questionnaires (n = 254 at the Cavendish Centre and n = 267 at the Bristol Cancer Help Centre), the mean change (S.D.) for the first concern score was 2.9 (1.63) and 1.91 (1.58) for the second concern score 2.5 (1.73)/1.77 (1.96) and for the wellbeing score 1.4 (1.8)/0.61 (1.52), respectively. The open question collected valuable extra data. Discussion: MYCaW is a questionnaire that is appropriate for the service offered, acceptable to patients, practitioners and researchers, and is responsive to change. Further validation work is planned. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:38 / 45
页数:8
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
BOTTING D, 1998, INT J PALLIAT NURS, V4, P32
[2]  
BOWLING A, 1995, MEASURING DIS REV DI, P21
[3]   Measuring quality of life - Are quality of life measures patient centred? [J].
Carr, AJ ;
Higginson, IJ .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 322 (7298) :1357-1360
[4]  
CHAPMAN R, 2001, EUR J ORIENTAL M SEP, P48
[5]  
COOKE H, 2000, THESIS U EXETER
[6]   Interpreting treatment effects in randomised trials [J].
Guyatt, GH ;
Juniper, EF ;
Walter, SD ;
Griffith, LE ;
Goldstein, RS .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 316 (7132) :690-693
[7]   DETERMINING A MINIMAL IMPORTANT CHANGE IN A DISEASE-SPECIFIC QUALITY-OF-LIFE QUESTIONNAIRE [J].
JUNIPER, EF ;
GUYATT, GH ;
WILLAN, A ;
GRIFFITH, LE .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1994, 47 (01) :81-87
[8]   Developing a tool to measure holistic practice: a missing dimension in outcomes measurement within complementary therapies [J].
Long, AF ;
Mercer, G ;
Hughes, K .
COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN MEDICINE, 2000, 8 (01) :26-31
[9]  
Meenan R, 2001, J Health Serv Res Policy, V6, P38, DOI 10.1258/1355819011927189
[10]  
MORRIS J, 1991, CANC TOPICS, V8, P75