| Mohamed Alorabi,Dina Salem,Azza Adel,Ahmed Ezzat,Zeinab Elsayed. Feasibility and reliability of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) in Egyptian patients with advanced cancer: A single institutional experience. Oncol Transl Med, 2016, 2: 132-137. |
| 切实和埃德蒙顿症状评估系统（ ESAS -R ）在埃及的晚期癌症患者的可靠性：单机构经验 |
| Feasibility and reliability of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) in Egyptian patients with advanced cancer: A single institutional experience |
| Received:January 23, 2016 Revised:May 27, 2016 |
| DOI：10.1007/s10330-016-0134-z |
| 中文关键词: 癌症晚期姑息治疗，埃及，埃德蒙顿症状评估系统。 |
| 英文关键词: advanced cancer; palliative care; Egypt; Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Hits: 13003 |
| Download times: 11338 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的
这项研究的目的是测试的修改后的埃德蒙顿症状评估系统（ESAS-R）的阿拉伯语版本的验收，可行性和实用性埃及之间的晚期癌症患者，并比较症状病人和医生记录了利率。
患者与方法
2014年间月和2015年2月，共有140例患者在开罗艾因夏姆斯大学医院，埃及接受修订后的埃德蒙顿症状评估系统（ESAS-R）的阿拉伯语版本。对于每位患者，ESAS-R取两次，第一次由治疗医师（作为基本评估的一部分）和一个第二时间由患者，具有最大的两次评估之间2小时。另外一个调查中添加，以评估病人的接受和喜好，并包括在内。
结果
出的140例患者入选本研究; 11例患者拒绝完成问卷调查，10人被排除由于他们的医疗记录不完整记录。完整的数据检索谁被列入了进一步分析119例。 78例（65％）宣称，测试是清晰和易于完成。能回答这个测试没有帮助。统称疲倦和幸福感是在病人和医生进行两个得分中最常遇到的症状，但疲劳是两个分数之间的唯一显著区别是更高时患者自己做了评估（p值：0.032）。内部一致性信度检验表明，这两个测试由医生进行，患者是内在一致的和信度由医生进行的测试是0.877，而对于受术者进行的测试信度是0.863.All欧空局得分过良好的内部一致性，以0.88信度的α系数。内部一致性仍然去除个体症状评分，与信度的α系数从0.823到0.902后高，这表明没有任何个人问题，对总的欧空局比分不当影响。
结论
使用修订后的埃德蒙顿症状评估系统（ESAS-R）是容易理解和适用于病人。有在由患者和医生报告的症状发生率无显著差异。在此基础上，就可以把测试在更大的规模在家用患者施加。这个测试可以有成本效益的价值，可以降低中晚期癌症患者需要支持治疗，而不是积极的治疗癌症的医院探访。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective This study aims to test the acceptance, feasibility, and usefulness of the Arabic version of the
revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) among Egyptian patients with advanced cancer
and to compare the rates of symptoms documented by patients and physicians.
Methods Between August 2014 and February 2015, a total of 140 patients at Ain Shams University
Hospitals in Cairo, Egypt received the Arabic version of the ESAS-r. For each patient, the ESAS-r was
completed twice, first by the treating physician (as part of the basic assessment) and a second time by the
patient, with a maximum of 2 hours between the two assessments. An additional survey was included to
assess patients’ acceptance of the survey and their preferences.
Results Out of 140 enrolled patients in the study, 11 patients refused to complete the questionnaire, and
10 patients were excluded due to incomplete records in their medical records. Complete data was retrieved
for 119 patients who were included for further analyses. The 78 (65%) patients declared that the test was
clear and easy to complete. They were able to answer the test without help. Collectively, tiredness and
sense of well-being were the most commonly encountered symptoms in ratings obtained by both patients
and physicians. Tiredness was the only symptom showing a significant difference between the two rating
methods, patient-rated scores being higher (P = 0.032). Cronbach’s alpha showed that both tests completed by the physician and the patients were internally consistent: the physician-rated test had a coefficient
of 0.877, and the patient-rated test had a coefficient of 0.863. All ESAS scores had good internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.88. The internal consistency remained high after removal of
individual symptom scores, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.823 to 0.902, indicating that
no individual question had undue influence on the total ESAS score.
Conclusion The ESAS-r was easily understood by and applicable to patients. There was no significant
discrepancy in the rates of symptoms reported by the patients and physicians, apart from tiredness. Based
on this, the test could be applied on a larger scale with in-home patients. This test can be cost-effective and
can decrease the number of hospital visits among advanced cancer patients in need of supportive treatment rather than active cancer therapy |
|
View Full Text
Download reader HTML全文 |
| Close |