Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 4/2011

01-04-2011 | Original Article

Caregiver satisfaction with out-patient oncology services: utility of the FAMCARE instrument and development of the FAMCARE-6

Authors: Gregory Leigh Carter, Terry J. Lewin, Louisa Gianacas, Kerrie Clover, Catherine Adams

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 4/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate caregivers’ experience of oncology services for ambulatory patients and to develop a short instrument (FAMCARE-6) suitable for computerised administration in the clinical setting.

Methods

A sample of 234 caregivers recruited from 388 ambulatory oncology patients completed a computerised version of the 20-item family satisfaction with advanced cancer care (FAMCARE) instrument, which was originally developed for use in palliative care settings.

Results

Caregivers reported generally high satisfaction with all aspects of ambulatory oncology services: overall score; mean, 3.96 (SD, 0.67); information giving, 3.88 (0.78); physical patient care, 4.00 (0.71); availability of care, 3.89 (0.77); and psychosocial care, 4.05 (0.72), from a possible score of 5. Factor analyses identified a single factor structure; the items were reduced to six (FAMCARE-6), which yielded a scale with adequate psychometric properties (completion rates over 90% for every item, correlation of 0.7 or above with the factor identified in the individual item factor analysis, and internal reliability of α = 0.85). The overall mean score was 3.91 (SD, 0.73) for the FAMCARE-6.

Conclusions

FAMCARE-6 can be used to assess caregiver satisfaction with ambulatory oncology services and may be suitable to be included as part of a computerised screening system for the psychological care of oncology patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Emanuel EJ, Fairclough DL, Slutsman J, Alpert H, Baldwin D, Emanuel LL (1999) Assistance from family members, friends, paid care givers, and volunteers in the care of terminally ill patients. N Engl J Med 341:956–963PubMedCrossRef Emanuel EJ, Fairclough DL, Slutsman J, Alpert H, Baldwin D, Emanuel LL (1999) Assistance from family members, friends, paid care givers, and volunteers in the care of terminally ill patients. N Engl J Med 341:956–963PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Girgis A, Johnson C, Aoun S, Currow D (2006) Challenges experienced by informal caregivers in cancer. Cancer Forum 30:21–25 Girgis A, Johnson C, Aoun S, Currow D (2006) Challenges experienced by informal caregivers in cancer. Cancer Forum 30:21–25
3.
go back to reference Morris SM, Thomas C (2001) The carer’s place in the cancer situation: where does the carer stand in the medical setting? Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 10:87–95CrossRef Morris SM, Thomas C (2001) The carer’s place in the cancer situation: where does the carer stand in the medical setting? Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 10:87–95CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kristjanson LJ, Aoun S (2004) Palliative care for families: remembering the hidden patients. Can J Psychiatry 49:359–365PubMed Kristjanson LJ, Aoun S (2004) Palliative care for families: remembering the hidden patients. Can J Psychiatry 49:359–365PubMed
5.
go back to reference Ringdal GI, Jordhoy MS, Kaasa S (2003) Measuring quality of palliative care: psychometric properties of the FAMCARE Scale. Qual Life Res 12:167–176PubMedCrossRef Ringdal GI, Jordhoy MS, Kaasa S (2003) Measuring quality of palliative care: psychometric properties of the FAMCARE Scale. Qual Life Res 12:167–176PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Thomas C, Morris SM (2002) Informal carers in cancer contexts. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 11:178–182CrossRef Thomas C, Morris SM (2002) Informal carers in cancer contexts. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 11:178–182CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Edwards B, Ung L (2002) Quality of life instruments for caregivers of patients with cancer: a review of their psychometric properties. Cancer Nurs 25:342–349PubMedCrossRef Edwards B, Ung L (2002) Quality of life instruments for caregivers of patients with cancer: a review of their psychometric properties. Cancer Nurs 25:342–349PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Carter G, Lewin T, Rashid G, Adams C, Clover K (2008) Computerised assessment of quality of life in oncology patients and carers. Psychooncology 17:26–33PubMedCrossRef Carter G, Lewin T, Rashid G, Adams C, Clover K (2008) Computerised assessment of quality of life in oncology patients and carers. Psychooncology 17:26–33PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Clover K, Carter GL, Mackinnon A, Adams C (2009) Is my patient suffering clinically significant emotional distress? Demonstration of a probabilities approach to evaluating algorithms for screening for distress. Support Care Cancer -online publication March 2009: doi:10.1007/s00520-009-0606-6 Clover K, Carter GL, Mackinnon A, Adams C (2009) Is my patient suffering clinically significant emotional distress? Demonstration of a probabilities approach to evaluating algorithms for screening for distress. Support Care Cancer -online publication March 2009: doi:10.​1007/​s00520-009-0606-6
10.
go back to reference Clover K, Rogers K, Carter G, Adams C (2008) QUICA-TOUCH: the first 12 months of screening for distress, pain and psychopathology. Asia Pacific J Clin Oncol 4(Suppl 2):A60 Clover K, Rogers K, Carter G, Adams C (2008) QUICA-TOUCH: the first 12 months of screening for distress, pain and psychopathology. Asia Pacific J Clin Oncol 4(Suppl 2):A60
11.
go back to reference Kristjanson LJ (1989) Quality of terminal care: salient indicators identified by families. J Palliat Care 5:21–30PubMed Kristjanson LJ (1989) Quality of terminal care: salient indicators identified by families. J Palliat Care 5:21–30PubMed
12.
go back to reference Kristjanson LJ (1993) Validity and reliability testing of the FAMCARE scale—measuring family satisfaction with advanced cancer care. Soc Sci Med 36:693–701PubMedCrossRef Kristjanson LJ (1993) Validity and reliability testing of the FAMCARE scale—measuring family satisfaction with advanced cancer care. Soc Sci Med 36:693–701PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference The WHOQOL Group (1998) Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychol Med 28:551–558CrossRef The WHOQOL Group (1998) Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychol Med 28:551–558CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kristjanson LJ, Leis A, Koop PM, Carriere KC, Mueller B (1997) Family members’ care expectations, care perceptions, and satisfaction with advanced cancer care: results of a multi-site pilot study. J Palliat Care 13:5–13PubMed Kristjanson LJ, Leis A, Koop PM, Carriere KC, Mueller B (1997) Family members’ care expectations, care perceptions, and satisfaction with advanced cancer care: results of a multi-site pilot study. J Palliat Care 13:5–13PubMed
15.
go back to reference Medigovich K, Porock D, Kristjanson LJ, Smith M (1999) Predictors of family satisfaction with an Australian palliative home care service: a test of discrepancy theory. J Palliat Care 15:48–56PubMed Medigovich K, Porock D, Kristjanson LJ, Smith M (1999) Predictors of family satisfaction with an Australian palliative home care service: a test of discrepancy theory. J Palliat Care 15:48–56PubMed
16.
go back to reference Knight RG, Williams S, McGee R, Olaman S (1998) Caregiving and well-being in a sample of women in midlife. Aust N Z J Public Health 22:616–620PubMedCrossRef Knight RG, Williams S, McGee R, Olaman S (1998) Caregiving and well-being in a sample of women in midlife. Aust N Z J Public Health 22:616–620PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Allen SM, Goldscheider F, Ciambrone DA (1999) Gender roles, marital intimacy, and nomination of spouse as primary caregiver. Gerontologist 39:150–158PubMed Allen SM, Goldscheider F, Ciambrone DA (1999) Gender roles, marital intimacy, and nomination of spouse as primary caregiver. Gerontologist 39:150–158PubMed
18.
go back to reference Grunfeld E, Coyle D, Whelan T, Clinch J, Reyno L, Earle CC, Willan A, Viola R, Coristine M, Janz T, Glossop R (2004) Family caregiver burden: results of a longitudinal study of breast cancer patients and their principal caregivers. Can Med Assoc J 170:1795–1801CrossRef Grunfeld E, Coyle D, Whelan T, Clinch J, Reyno L, Earle CC, Willan A, Viola R, Coristine M, Janz T, Glossop R (2004) Family caregiver burden: results of a longitudinal study of breast cancer patients and their principal caregivers. Can Med Assoc J 170:1795–1801CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Ringdal GI, Jordhoy MS, Kaasa S (2002) Family satisfaction with end-of-life care for cancer patients in a cluster randomized trial. J Pain Symptom Manage 24:53–63PubMedCrossRef Ringdal GI, Jordhoy MS, Kaasa S (2002) Family satisfaction with end-of-life care for cancer patients in a cluster randomized trial. J Pain Symptom Manage 24:53–63PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kristjanson LJ (1986) Indicators of quality of palliative care from a family perspective. J Palliat Care 1:8–17PubMed Kristjanson LJ (1986) Indicators of quality of palliative care from a family perspective. J Palliat Care 1:8–17PubMed
21.
go back to reference Heading G, Mallock N, Sinclair S, Bishop J (2008) New South Wales Cancer Patient Satisfaction Survey 2007, Interim Report. Cancer Institute NSW catalogue number: CR-2008-1 Heading G, Mallock N, Sinclair S, Bishop J (2008) New South Wales Cancer Patient Satisfaction Survey 2007, Interim Report. Cancer Institute NSW catalogue number: CR-2008-1
Metadata
Title
Caregiver satisfaction with out-patient oncology services: utility of the FAMCARE instrument and development of the FAMCARE-6
Authors
Gregory Leigh Carter
Terry J. Lewin
Louisa Gianacas
Kerrie Clover
Catherine Adams
Publication date
01-04-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-010-0858-1

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

Supportive Care in Cancer 4/2011 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine