Qualitative research on the Belgian Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES): An evaluation of the content validity and feasibility. Issue 3 (23rd January 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schouten, Bojoura; Hellings, Johan; Vankrunkelsven, Patrick; Mebis, Jeroen; Bulens, Paul; Buntinx, Frank; Vandijck, Dominique; Van Hoof, Elke
• Is Part Of: Journal of evaluation in clinical practice. Volume 23:Issue 3(2017)
• Page Start: 599
• Page End: 607
• Publication Date: 2017-01-23
• Subjects: assessment -- cancer -- care needs -- patient‐centeredness -- quality of life; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; 616.005
• DOI: 10.1111/jep.12681
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1356-1294

Abstract

Abstract: Rationale, aims, and objectives: The systematic assessment of cancer patients well‐being and care needs is internationally recommended to optimize comprehensive cancer care. The Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES) is a psychometrically robust quality of life and needs assessment tool of US origin, developed in the early 1990s. This article describes Belgian patients' view on the content validity and feasibility of the CARES for use in current cancer care. Methods: Participants were cancer patients recruited through media. Data were gathered in 4 focus groups (n = 26). The focus group discussions were facilitated with key questions. A moderator and an observer conducted and followed up the discussion. The audio file was transcribed verbatim and afterwards analyzed thematically. Results: Participants experience concerns and needs in a wide range of life domains such as physical, emotional, cognitive, social, relational, sexual, financial, and work‐related and in the interaction with care professionals. According to participants, the items of the CARES are all relevant to capture the possible life disruption that cancer patients and survivors experience. One important theme is missing in the CARES, namely, the well‐being of loved ones. The completion time of the CARES was judged to be feasible, and according to participants, only a few items need a reformulation. Conclusions: In general, the results of this study support the content validity and feasibility of the CARES. However, little adjustments in formulation and a few extra items are needed. The instrument can be used to obtain a comprehensive assessment of a cancer patients' overall well‐being and care needs to take dedicated action in care.