Validity and Reliability of a New Instrument to Measure Cancer-Related Fatigue in Adolescents

Abstract

Adolescents undergoing treatment for cancer rate fatigue as their most prevalent and intense cancer- and treatment-related effect. Parents and staff rate it similarly. Despite its reported prevalence, intensity, and distressing effects, cancer-related fatigue in adolescents is not routinely assessed during or after cancer treatment. We contend that the insufficient clinical attention is primarily due to the lack of a reliable and valid self-report instrument with which adolescent cancer-related fatigue can be measured. Our aim was to determine the reliability and construct validity of a new instrument and its ability to measure change in fatigue over time. Initial testing involved 64 adolescents undergoing curative treatment of cancer who completed the Fatigue Scale-Adolescent (FS-A) at two to four key points in treatment in one of four studies. Internal consistency estimates ranged from 0.67 to 0.95. Validity estimates involving the FS-A with the parent version ranged from 0.13 to 0.76; estimates involving the staff version and the Reynolds Depression Scale were 0.27 and 0.87, respectively. Additional validity findings included significant fatigue differences between anemic and nonanemic patients (P=0.042) and the emergence of four factors in an exploratory factor analysis. Findings further indicate that the FS-A can be used to measure change over time (t=2.55, P<0.01). In summary, the FS-A has moderate to strong reliability and impressive validity coefficients for a new research instrument.

Exercise Training Program and Telenursing Effects on Depression and Fatigue Level in B- Thalathemia Major Children

“…Adopted from Hinds et al, 2007, and translated to arabic by the researchers. This self-reporting 14 items that describe the fatigue intensity during the previous week in children using a five-point Likert scale.…”

Developing Scales for the Assessment of Fatigue in Turkish Pediatric Oncology Patients Aged 13-18 and their Parents

“…As a result of the literature review, dimensions were formed to determine the fatigue from all aspects (Hinds and Hockenberrt-Eaton, 2001;Varni et al, 2002;Hinds, 2007;Gerçeker and Bal, 2012 Being a likert scale, this scale is graded between "1" and "5". While the lowest score to be obtained from the scale is 27, the highest score is 135.…”

“…As a result of the literature review, dimensions were formed to determine the fatigue from all aspects (Hinds and HockenberrtEaton, 2001;Varni et al, 2002;Hinds, 2007;Gerçeker and Bal, 2012). According to literature, the fatigue assessment should be multi-factorial and its interventions multilateral, and it should be applied to children and parents simultaneously (Hinds and Hockenberry, 2001 Being a likert scale, this scale is graded between "1" and "5".…”

“…While forming the item pool of the Fatigue Scale for Pediatric Oncology Patients and Parents, we examined the literature and reached studies defining the fatigue and general and child-specific scales regarding the fatigue. As a result of the literature review, dimensions were formed to determine the fatigue from all aspects and item pools were developed for these dimensions (Hinds and Hockenberry-Eaton, 2001;Varni et al, 2002;Hinds, 2007;Gerçeker and Bal, 2012).…”

Fatigue in Child Chronic Health Conditions: A Systematic Review of Assessment Instruments

“…Internal consistency and reliability data were mixed; although internal consistency statistics were good (0.70 or greater), [79][80][81]107,113 these statistics were calculated based on the total fatigue scores, despite findings of a 3-factor model for the FS-C and a 4-factor model for the FS-A. 79,80 One study revealed adequate reliability statistics for the FS-A, presenting pooled data from a series of studies, and variable agreement between parent and child were found across included studies (ICC values 0.13-0.65). 79 The Fatigue Scale-Staff (FS-S) demonstrated moderate evidence for internal consistency and content validity and limited evidence for structural validity.…”