Observer error in grading performance status in cancer patients
- PMID: 10483818
- DOI: 10.1007/s005200050271
Observer error in grading performance status in cancer patients
Abstract
To assess the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale with respect to interobserver reliability and interobserver difference between the two scales, 100 consecutive patients in a medical oncology unit were assessed using both scales, which were then given to three independent raters and also to the patients themselves. There was a high level of agreement between most paired assessors. There were three exceptions, which were the RMO/patient and nurse/patient pairs on the KPS scale and the RMO/patient pair on the ECOG scale. The level of agreement was better on the ECOG scale. For individual raters there is no statistical difference between the ECOG and Karnofsky scales. There was good agreement between all raters for both scales. Interobserver variability was less using the ECOG scale. We conclude that either scale could be used with good interobserver reliability. The ECOG scale minimises differences between observers.
Similar articles
-
The Functionality Assessment Flowchart (FAF): a new simple and reliable method to measure performance status with a high percentage of agreement between observers.BMC Cancer. 2015 Jul 5;15:501. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1526-0. BMC Cancer. 2015. PMID: 26142726 Free PMC article.
-
Karnofsky and ECOG performance status scoring in lung cancer: a prospective, longitudinal study of 536 patients from a single institution.Eur J Cancer. 1996 Jun;32A(7):1135-41. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(95)00664-8. Eur J Cancer. 1996. PMID: 8758243
-
Intra and interobserver variability in cancer patients' performance status assessed according to Karnofsky and ECOG scales.Ann Oncol. 1991 Jun;2(6):437-9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.annonc.a057981. Ann Oncol. 1991. PMID: 1768630 Clinical Trial.
-
Inter-rater reliability in performance status assessment between clinicians and patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2020 Jun;10(2):129-135. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2019-002080. Epub 2019 Dec 5. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2020. PMID: 31806655
-
Moving beyond Karnofsky and ECOG Performance Status Assessments with New Technologies.J Oncol. 2016;2016:6186543. doi: 10.1155/2016/6186543. Epub 2016 Mar 15. J Oncol. 2016. PMID: 27066075 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Remote Oncology Care: Review of Current Technology and Future Directions.Cureus. 2020 Aug 31;12(8):e10156. doi: 10.7759/cureus.10156. Cureus. 2020. PMID: 33014652 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparing Physician and Nurse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) Ratings as Predictors of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Cancer.Oncologist. 2019 Dec;24(12):e1460-e1466. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0882. Epub 2019 Jun 21. Oncologist. 2019. PMID: 31227648 Free PMC article.
-
Inter-rater reliability in performance status assessment among healthcare professionals: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Support Care Cancer. 2020 May;28(5):2071-2078. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-05261-7. Epub 2020 Jan 3. Support Care Cancer. 2020. PMID: 31900613
-
Smartphone-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment for the Measurement of the Performance Status and Health-Related Quality of Life in Cancer Patients Under Systemic Anticancer Therapies: Development and Acceptability of a Mobile App.Front Oncol. 2022 Jul 13;12:880430. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.880430. eCollection 2022. Front Oncol. 2022. PMID: 35936756 Free PMC article.
-
Patient reported outcomes can improve performance status assessment: a pilot study.J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2019 Jul 16;3(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s41687-019-0136-z. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2019. PMID: 31313047 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources