Secondary analysis of QLQ-C30 and FACT-G data from a randomized controlled trial of Medical Qigong (n聽=聽162 heterogeneous cancer patients). Difference in responsiveness (DR) and relative efficiency (RE) were calculated for five domains.
FACT-G total score was more efficient than QLQ-C30 global scale for detecting change within the intervention arm [RE聽=聽0.31 (0.083, 0.69)] and comparing change between trial arms [RE聽=聽0.17 (0.009, 0.58)]. In the social domain, the QLQ-C30 scale was more responsive [DR聽=聽0.28 (0.024, 0.54)] and more efficient within arm only [RE聽=聽5.25 (1.21, 232.26)]. In the physical, functional/role, and emotional domains, neither questionnaire was more responsive or efficient.
FACT-G would require about one-third the sample of QLQ-C30 to detect a given change in overall HRQOL, whereas in the social domain, it would require five times the sample size. FACT-G won advantage in overall HRQOL by reduced 鈥渘oise鈥?(smaller standard deviation achieved by summing across 27 items), whereas QLQ-C30 won advantage in the social domain via a larger 鈥渟ignal鈥?(achieved through well-targeted item content).