Spanish Version of the Patient Dignity Inventory: Translation and Validation in Patients With Advanced Cancer

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Marí ; a Rullá ; n ; MD^a ; ^b ; Ana Carvajal ; RN ; PhD^c ; ^{acarvajal@unav.es" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Jorge M. Nú ; ñ ; ez-Có ; rdoba ; PhD^d ; ^e ; ^f ; ^h ; Marina Martí ; nez ; BPsych ; PhDⁱ ; José ; Miguel Carrasco ; PhD^b ; ^g ; Irene Garcí ; a ; BPsych^b ; ^g ; Marí ; a Arantzamendi ; RN ; PhD^b ; ^c ; ^g ; Alazne Belar ; RN ; MSc^b ; ^j ; Carlos Centeno ; MD ; PhD^b ; ^g ; ⁱ
• 关键词：Advanced cancer patients ; validation ; psychometric properties ; Patient Dignity Inventory ; dignity therapy
• 刊名：Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：December 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：50
• 期：6
• 页码：874-881.e1
• 全文大小：286 K

文摘

The Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI) is an instrument to measure sources of distress related to dignity at the end of life.

Objectives

To obtain a Spanish version of the PDI and measure psychometric aspects in patients with advanced cancer.

Methods

A back-translation method was used to obtain the Spanish version. Inpatients and outpatients with advanced cancer were included. Patients completed the Spanish versions of the PDI (PDI-s), Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being (FACIT-Sp-12) instruments. The psychometric properties evaluated were internal consistency; concurrent validity between PDI-s/ESAS, PDI-s/HADS, and PDI-s/FACIT-Sp-12; discriminant validity, test-retest reliability, and factor analysis. The usefulness of the instrument also was tested.

Results

A Spanish version of the PDI was obtained. One hundred twenty-four patients completed the study. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the PDI-s was 0.89. The PDI-s significantly correlated with the ESAS (rs = 0.669; P < 0.001), HADS (rs = 0.788; P < 0.001), and FACIT-Sp-12 (rs = −0.442; P = 0.008). The instrument distinguished outpatients from inpatients and between patients with differing Karnofsky Performance Status scores (rs = −0.328; P < 0.001). The test-retest method indicated excellent reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.931). Factor analysis showed three factors accounting for 79.4% of the variance. Factors were labeled psychological and existential distress, physical symptoms and dependency, and social support. Patients had no difficulties in understanding or completing the questionnaire (mean time to complete: 7.2 minutes).

Conclusion

The Spanish version of the PDI showed adequate psychometric properties when tested with advanced cancer patients. This research provides a three-factor alternative in Spanish to the PDI.