Validating performance status and activities of daily living assessment tools for Chinese palliative care in a cancer setting: A cross-cultural psychometric study
- PMID: 39641010
- PMCID: PMC11617370
- DOI: 10.1016/j.apjon.2024.100613
Validating performance status and activities of daily living assessment tools for Chinese palliative care in a cancer setting: A cross-cultural psychometric study
Abstract
Objective: National approaches to the routine assessment of palliative care patients improve patient outcomes. However, validated tools and a national methodology for this are lacking in Mainland China. The Australian Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC) model is a well-established national program aimed at improving the quality of palliative care based on point-of-care outcomes assessment. This study aimed to culturally adapt and validate two measures used in PCOC (Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status [AKPS], Resource Utilization Groups - Activities of Daily Living [RUG-ADL]) in the Chinese context.
Methods: A cross-cultural adaptation and validation study involving forward and backward translation methods, cognitive interviewing, and psychometric testing.
Results: Two minor adjustments were made to the scoring instructions for the RUG-ADL, and the AKPS remained unchanged. Twenty-two clinicians participated in psychometric testing, completing 363 paired assessments on 135 inpatients. The correlations between AKPS and the Barthel index (BI) for activities of daily living (r = 0.77, P < 0.001), AKPS and RUG-ADL (r = -0.82, P < 0.001), RUG-ADL and BI (r = -0.67 to -0.76) demonstrated good concurrent validity for both the AKPS and the RUG-ADL. The inter-rater reliability for AKPS (k = 0.63) and RUG-ADL were substantial and moderate (k = 0.51-0.56), respectively. The RUG-ADL also showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.92). Both tools were able to detect patients' urgent needs.
Conclusions: The Chinese version of AKPS and RUG-ADL can be systematically used to assess performance status and dependency among palliative care patients. However, observational assessments and enhanced communication between clinicians and patients/caregivers is also recommended for optimal clinical utility.
Keywords: Australia-Modified Karnofsky Performance Status; Palliative care; Point of care resources assessment; Reliability; Resource Utilization Groups-Activities of Daily Living; Validity.
© 2024 The Authors.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest. Professor Yongyi Chen, the corresponding author, serves on the editorial board of the Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing. The article underwent standard review procedures of the journal, with peer review conducted independently of Professor Chen and their research groups.
Similar articles
-
Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of point-of-care outcome assessment tools in Chinese palliative care clinical practice.BMC Palliat Care. 2024 Apr 3;23(1):89. doi: 10.1186/s12904-024-01395-6. BMC Palliat Care. 2024. PMID: 38566178 Free PMC article.
-
Palliative care burden and specialist service utilisation for individuals with cardiovascular disease in Australia: a national population-based observational study.BMJ Open. 2025 May 22;15(5):e096435. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-096435. BMJ Open. 2025. PMID: 40404323 Free PMC article.
-
Australian Palliative Care Outcome Collaboration (PCOC) phases: cross cultural adaptation and psychometric validation for Polish palliative settings.BMC Palliat Care. 2024 Dec 27;23(1):301. doi: 10.1186/s12904-024-01616-y. BMC Palliat Care. 2024. PMID: 39725938 Free PMC article.
-
Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the Problems and Needs in Palliative Care questionnaire-short version in advanced cancer patients.BMC Palliat Care. 2019 Aug 6;18(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0450-5. BMC Palliat Care. 2019. PMID: 31387575 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical frailty and performance scale translation in palliative care: scoping review.BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022 Jun 1:bmjspcare-2022-003658. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003658. Online ahead of print. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022. PMID: 35649714 Review.
Cited by
-
Machine learning model for prediction of palliative care phases in patients with advanced cancer: a retrospective study.BMC Palliat Care. 2025 May 24;24(1):148. doi: 10.1186/s12904-025-01785-4. BMC Palliat Care. 2025. PMID: 40413472 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Eagar K., Watters P., Currow D.C., Aoun S.M., Yates P. The Australian Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC)–measuring the quality and outcomes of palliative care on a routine basis. Aust Health Rev. 2010;34(2):186–192. - PubMed
-
- Hayes J. British Medical Journal Publishing Group; 2018. 35 Does Australian-Modified Karnofsky Performance Status (Akps) Help Predict Outcome for Patients Admitted to a Hospice Inpatient Unit?
-
- Morgan D.D., Brown A., Cerdor P.A., Currow D.C. Does resource utilization group-activities of daily living help us better interpret Australian karnofsky-modified performance scale? J Palliat Med. 2020;23(9):1153–1154. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources