İsmail OKAN, Nagihan Yıldız ÇELTEK, Osman DEMİR, Mustafa SÜREN

Karnofsky Performance Scale validity and reliability of Turkish palliative cancer patients

Background/aim: Validated measures in palliative cancer patients are very important in the evaluation and management of the disease.The Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) has been used for many years to assess the performance status of cancer patients. The aim ofthis study is to determine the validity and reliability of the KPS in cancer patients receiving palliative care in Turkey.Materials and methods: Eighty patients with a cancer diagnosis who were admitted to Gaziosmanpaşa University Medical FacultyHospital Palliative Care Unit between 01.03.2016 and 01.03.2017 were included in the study. KPS, measurements from the Katz Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scale, and Basic Activities of Daily Living (BADL) scale were recorded. The alpha coefficient (Cronbach) wascalculated by using SPSS version 20.0. The P-value was accepted as P < 0.05 in the analysis of the data.Results: There was a positive and strong correlation between Katz ADL scale total score and KPS score (r = 0.895; P < 0.001). In addition, there was a strong negative correlation between the total score of BADL scale and KPS score (r = –0.894; P < 0.001). As for thereliability of the scale scores, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient found to be 0.720.Conclusion: KPS is a reliable scale for Turkish cancer patients in palliative care settings.

PDF

___

1. Taspınar Ö, Aydın T, Akcakaya A. The importance of palliative care in cancer rehabilitation. Bezmialem Science 2014; 1: 31- 37. doi:10.14235/bs.2013.213
2. Yıldız Celtek N, Okan I. Palyatif bakımda hastaya yaklaşım ve değerlendirme ölçekleri. Türkiye Klinikleri Family Medicine, Special Topics, 2017; 8 (4): 241-245 (in Turkish).
3. Sutradhar R, Seow H, Earle C, Dudgeon D, Atzema C et al. Modeling the longitudinal transitions of performance status in cancer outpatients: Time to discuss palliative care. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 2013 Apr; 45 (4): 726-734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.03.014
4. Mor V, Lalıberte L, Morrıs JN, Wıemann M. The Karnofsky performance status scale an examination of its reliability and validity in a research setting. Cancer 1984 May 1; 53 (9): 2002- 2007. Version of Record online: 28 Jun 2006.
5. Yıldız Celtek N, Okan I. Palyatif bakımda hasta değerlendirmesi ve skalalar. Klinik Tıp Dergisi, 2016; 8 (3): 6-11 (in Turkish).
6. Singh DP. Quality of life in cancer patients receiving palliative care. Indian Journal of Palliative Care 2010 Jan; 16 (1): 36-43. doi: 10.4103/0973-1075.63133
7. Peus D, Newcomb N, Hofer S. Appraisal of the Karnofsky performance status and proposal of a simple algorithmic system for its evaluation. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2013; 13: 72. 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947- 13-72
8. Katz S, Down TD, Cash HR, Grotz RC. Progress in the development of the index of ADL. Gerontologist 1970 Spring; 10(1): 20-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/10.1_Part_1.20
9. Diker J, Etiler N, Yıldız M, Şeref B. Association between cognitive status and activities of daily living, life quality and some demographic variables in older than 65. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi 2001; 2 (2): 79-86.
10. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: Selfmaintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969 Autumn; 9 (3): 179-186.
11. Schag CC, Heinrich RL, Ganz PA. Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1984 Mar; 2 (3): 187-193. doi: 10.1200/ JCO.1984.2.3.187
12. Yates JW, Chalmer B, Mckegney FP. Evaluation of patients with advanced cancer using the Karnofsky performance status. Cancer 1980; 45 (8): 2220-2204.
13. Roila F, Lupattelli M, Sassi M, Basurto C, Bracarda S et al. Intra and interobserver variability in cancer patients’ performance status assessed according to Karnofsky and ECOG scales. Annals of Oncology 1991 Jun; 2 (6): 437-439.
14. Liem BJ, Holland JM, Kang M, Hoffelt SC, Marquez CM. Karnofsky performance status assessment: Resident versus attending. Journal of Cancer Education 2002 Fall; 17 (3): 138- 1341. doi:10.1080/08858190209528821
15. Terret C, Albrand G, Moncenix G, Droz JP. Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) or Physical Performance Test (PPT)? That is the question. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology 2011 Feb; 77 (2): 142-147. doi:10.1016/j.critrevanc.2010.01.015