Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Comprehensive Needs Assessment Tool (CNAT) for Chinese Cancer Patients

Yin-Ping Zhang, Huan-Huan Wei, Xin-Shuang Zhao, Yao Zhang, Ya-Qiong Xu, Caroline Porr

Abstract


Rationale, aims and objectives: The appropriate assessment of a cancer patient’s needs is critical for high quality care services. However, a systematic assessment of an individual patient’s needs fundamental to person-centered healthcare, is rarely practised in China. This study aimed to adapt the Comprehensive Needs Assessment Tool (CNAT) to Chinese cancer patients and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly adapted Chinese CNAT.

Method: Cross-cultural adaptation of the original CNAT was performed according to published guidelines. A subsequent validation study was conducted with 300 cancer patients in Mainland China. Validity was determined through exploratory factor analysis and the known-group comparison. Reliability was determined using internal consistency and test-retest reliability.

Results: The overall CNAT had acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha coefficient 0.967 for the scale and 0.811~0.958 for subscales. Test-retest reliability by intra-class correlations was 0.877 for the overall scale. Principal component analysis resulted in an 8-factor structure explaining 70.325% of the total variance indicating good construct validity. Known-group validity was supported by its ability to detect significant differences according to sociodemographic and medical characteristics of participants.

Conclusions: The newly adapted Chinese CNAT scale possesses adequate validity, test-retest reliability and internal consistency in this population.


Keywords


Cancer nursing, cancer patients, Comprehensive Needs Assessment Tool (CNAT), holistic needs of the patient, needs assessment, person-centered healthcare, person-centered oncology, reliability, validity

Full Text:

PDF

References


Matsuda, T. & Saika, K. (2012). Worldwide Burden of Cancer Incidence in 2002 Extrapolated from Cancer Incidence in Five Continents Vol. IX. Japanese Journal Of Clinical Oncology 42 (11)1111-1112.

Cancer, C. R. U. I. A. f. R. o. (2014). World cancerfactsheet. Retrieved from http://publicationscancerresearchukorg/downloads/product/CS_REPORT_WORLDpdf.

Shin, D.W., Park, J.H., Shim, E.J., Park, J.H., Choi, J.Y., Kim, S.G. & Park, E.C. (2011). The development of a comprehensive needs assessment tool for cancer-caregivers in patient-caregiver dyads. Psycho-Oncology 20 (12) 1342-1352.

Akechi, T., Okuyama, T., Endo, C., Sagawa, R., Uchida, M., Nakaguchi, T., Akazawa, T., Yamashita, H., Toyama, T. & Furukawa, T. A. (2011). Patient's perceived need and psychological distress and/or quality of life in ambulatory breast cancer patients in Japan Psycho-Oncology, 20(5),497-505.

Thewes, B., Butow, P., Girgis, A., Pendlebury, S. (2004) The psychosocial needs of breast cancer survivors; A qualitative study of the shared and unique needs of younger versus older survivors. Psycho-Oncology 13 (3)177-189.

Jenkins, V., Fallowfield, L. & Saul, J. (2001). Information needs of patients with cancer: results from a large study in UK cancer centres. British Journal of Cancer 84 (1) 48-51.

Andreassen, S., Randers, I., Näslund, E., Stockeld, D. & Mattiasson, A.C. (2007). Information needs following a diagnosis of oesophageal cancer; self-perceived information needs of patients and family members compared with the perceptions of healthcare professionals a pilot study. European Journal of Cancer Care 16 (3) 277-285.

Bonevski, B., Sanson-Fisher, R., Girgis, A., Burton, L., Cook, P. & Boyes, A. (2000). Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Cancer 88 (1) 217-225.

Buzgova, R., Hajnova, E., Sikorova, L. & Jarosova, D. (2014). Association between unmet needs and quality of life in hospitalised cancer patients no longer receiving anti-cancer treatment. European Journal Of Cancer Care 23 (5) 685-694.

Cassileth, B.R., Zupkis, R.V., Sutton-Smith, K. & March, V. (1980). Information and participation preferences among cancer patients. Annals of Internal Medicine 92 (6) 832-836.

Shim, E.J., Lee, K.S., Park, J.H. & Park, J.H. (2011). Comprehensive needs assessment tool in cancer (CNAT): the development and validation. Supportive Care in Cancer 19 (12) 1957-1968.

Beaton, D.E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F. & Ferraz, M.B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25 (24) 3186-3191.

Wu, M. (2001). Statistical Applications Practice. Beijing: China Hallway Publishing House.

Gorsuch, R.L. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Comrey, A.L. & Lee, H.B. (1992). A frist course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Shrout, P.E. & Fleiss, J.L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin 86 (2) 420-428.

Osburn, H.G. (2000). Coefficient alpha and related internal consistency reliability coefficients. Psychological Methods 5 (3) 343-355.

Harman, H.H. (1967). Modern factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Fayers, P.M., Hopwood, P., Harvey, A., Girling, D.J., Machin, D. Stephens, R. (1997). Quality of life assessment in clinical trials - guidelines and a checklist for protocol writers: the U.K. Medical Research Council experience. MRC Cancer Trials Office. European Journal of Cancer 33 (1) 20-28.

Given, B.A., Given, C.W. & Kozachik, S. (2001). Family support in advanced cancer. CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians 51 (4) 213-231.

Sanchez, R., Ballesteros, M. & Arnold, B.J. (2011). Validation of the FACT-G scale for evaluating quality of life in cancer patients in Colombia. Quality of Life Research 20 (1) 19-29.

Stephan, A., Mayer, H., Guiteras, A.R. & Meyer, G. (2013). Validity, reliability, and feasibility of the German version of the Caregiver Reaction Assessment scale (G-CRA): a validation study. International Psychogeriatrics 25 (10) 1621-1628.

Wang, W., Lopez, V. & Thompson, D.R. (2006). A Chinese Mandarin translation and validation of the Myocardial Infarction Dimensional Assessment Scale (MIDAS). Quality of Life Research 15 (7) 1243-1249.

Lyons, R.A., Wareham, K., Lucas, M., Price, D., Williams, J. & Hutchings, H.A. (1999). SF-36 scores vary by method of administration: implications for study design. Journal of Public Health Medicine 21 (1) 41-45.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/ejpch.v4i1.1078

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.