“This second and final methodological and statistical validation of this auto-questionnaire QASICC allows us to propose it as a dedicated questionnaire to TIVAD’s cancer patients by using a score assessing acceptance and satisfaction regarding their device” Marcy et al (2015).
Marcy, P.Y., Dahlet, C., Brenet, O., Yazbec, G., Dubois, P.Y., Salm, B., Fouche, Y., Mari, V., Montastruc, M., Lebrec, N., Ancel, B., Paillocher, N., Dupoiron, D., Rangeard, O., Michel, C., Chateau, Y., Ettaiche, M., Ferrero, J.M. and Chamorey, E. (2015) Multicenter validation study of a questionnaire assessing patient satisfaction with and acceptance of totally-implanted central venous access devices. Bulletin du Cancer. March 20th. .
Patient satisfaction questionnaire for totally-implanted central venous access devices http://ctt.ec/a96qM+ @ivteam #ivteam
OBJECTIVE: Most cancer patients require a totally-implanted central venous access device (TIVAD) for their treatment. This was a prospective, multicenter, open study to: (i) develop and validate a French-language questionnaire dubbed QASICC (Questionnaire for Acceptance of and Satisfaction with Implanted Central Venous Catheter) assessing patient’s satisfaction with and acceptance of their TIVAD; (ii) develop a mean score of patient’s acceptance and satisfaction; (iii) look for correlation between QASICC score and TIVAD patient/tumor pathology/device characteristics.
METHODS: From 2011 November to 2012 December, the first version of the QASICC questionnaire that included 27 questions assessing seven dimensions was re-tested among 998 cancer patients in eleven French cancer hospitals (eight cancer research institutes and three university/general hospitals). The goal was: (i) to reduce the questionnaire item and dimension number (pertinency, saturation effect, item correlation); (ii) to assess its psychometric properties, demonstrate its validity and independency compared to (EORTC) QLQC30; (iii) to correlate clinical and pathological patient’s/tumor’s/TIVAD’s parameters with the QASICC questionnaire score (the higher the overall score, the greater the acceptance and satisfaction). The questionnaire was administered to the patient 30 days (±15 days) after TIVAD’s implantation.
RESULTS: Among 998 questionnaires given to cancer patients, 658 were analyzed and 464 were fully assessed as there was no missing data. Time to fill-in the questionnaire was five minutes in 90% patients. Final QASICC tool included twenty-two questions assessing four homogeneous dimensions (65%
CONCLUSIONS: This second and final methodological and statistical validation of this auto-questionnaire QASICC allows us to propose it as a dedicated questionnaire to TIVAD’s cancer patients by using a score assessing acceptance and satisfaction regarding their device.
Thank you to our partners for supporting IVTEAM