ObjectivePsychological suffering in malignant mesothelioma (MM) differs from that in other cancers because of its occupational etiology, and we aimed to develop specific patient-reported outcome measures to assess it. MethodsWe used a multi-method prospective observational multicentric study (N = 149), and a preliminary questionnaire validation was performed through a Bayesian approach. ResultsItem analysis showed a good internal consistency and reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.79 [95% CI = 0.74-0.93]. Twenty of the 41 initial items were selected as posterior 95% highest density interval factor loading standardized effect size fell outside of the region of practical equivalence. Bayesian exploratory factor analysis showed a two-factor structure: (1) Trauma-related reactions (TR, 13 items) and (2) Claim for justice (CJ, 7 items), confirmed by the Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis. Latent factors were poorly correlated (Posterior median: 0.13; 95% CI = -0.079 to 0.323). The 90% root mean square error of approximation posterior median was 0.04 [90% CI = 0.03-0.58]; the 90% chi-square posterior median was 242 [90% CI = 209-287]. ConclusionPsychological suffering in MM patients implies negative cognitive, emotional, and somatic reactions related to the traumatic impact of the disease and the need to obtain justice through economic compensation. Our findings provide preliminary evidence that the Mesothelioma Psychological Distress Tool-Patients could be a promising and reliable instrument to assess MM patients' psychological distress.

Preliminary validation of a brief PROM assessing psychological distress in patients with malignant mesothelioma: The mesothelioma psychological distress tool-Patients

Guglielmucci, Fanny;Franzoi, Isabella Giulia;Migliore, Enrica;Mensi, Carolina;Grosso, Federica;Granieri, Antonella
2022-01-01

Abstract

ObjectivePsychological suffering in malignant mesothelioma (MM) differs from that in other cancers because of its occupational etiology, and we aimed to develop specific patient-reported outcome measures to assess it. MethodsWe used a multi-method prospective observational multicentric study (N = 149), and a preliminary questionnaire validation was performed through a Bayesian approach. ResultsItem analysis showed a good internal consistency and reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.79 [95% CI = 0.74-0.93]. Twenty of the 41 initial items were selected as posterior 95% highest density interval factor loading standardized effect size fell outside of the region of practical equivalence. Bayesian exploratory factor analysis showed a two-factor structure: (1) Trauma-related reactions (TR, 13 items) and (2) Claim for justice (CJ, 7 items), confirmed by the Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis. Latent factors were poorly correlated (Posterior median: 0.13; 95% CI = -0.079 to 0.323). The 90% root mean square error of approximation posterior median was 0.04 [90% CI = 0.03-0.58]; the 90% chi-square posterior median was 242 [90% CI = 209-287]. ConclusionPsychological suffering in MM patients implies negative cognitive, emotional, and somatic reactions related to the traumatic impact of the disease and the need to obtain justice through economic compensation. Our findings provide preliminary evidence that the Mesothelioma Psychological Distress Tool-Patients could be a promising and reliable instrument to assess MM patients' psychological distress.
2022
13
974
982
asbestos; cancer; mental health; mesothelioma; patient-reported outcome measures; posttraumatic stress disorder; psycho-oncology; psychological distress
Guglielmucci, Fanny; Bonafede, Michela; Azzolina, Danila; Marinaccio, Alessandro; Franzoi, Isabella Giulia; Migliore, Enrica; Mensi, Carolina; Chellini, Elisabetta; Romeo, Elisa; Grosso, Federica; Granieri, Antonella
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
fpsyg-13-974982.pdf

Accesso aperto

Dimensione 907.03 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
907.03 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1889200
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact