Top

Published in:

01-03-2017 | Original Article

Validity and reliability of the Greek version of the xerostomia questionnaire in head and neck cancer patients

Authors: Pinelopi Theopisti Memtsa, Maria Tolia, Ioannis Tzitzikas, Ioannis Bizakis, Kyriaki Pistevou-Gombaki, Martha Charalambidou, Chrysoula Iliopoulou, George Kyrgias

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 3/2017

Abstract

Purpose

Xerostomia after radiation therapy for head and neck (H&N) cancer has serious effects on patients’ quality of life. The purpose of this study was to validate the Greek version of the self-reported eight-item xerostomia questionnaire (XQ) in patients treated with radiotherapy for H&N cancer.

Methods

The XQ was translated into Greek and administered to 100 XQ patients. An exploratory factor analysis was performed. Reliability measures were calculated. Several types of validity were evaluated. The observer-rated scoring system was also used.

Results

The mean XQ value was 41.92 (SD 22.71). Factor analysis revealed the unidimensional nature of the questionnaire. High reliability measures (ICC, Cronbach’s α, Pearson coefficients) were obtained. Patients differed statistically significantly in terms of XQ score, depending on the RTOG/EORTC classification.

Conclusion

The Greek version of XQ is valid and reliable. Its score is well related to observer’s findings and it can be used to evaluate the impact of radiation therapy on the subjective feeling of xerostomia.

Cicchetti, DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment 6: 284–290.

Over the 95th (pre-post) difference percentile. Mean difference in the 0–10 scale: 0.064 ± 0.21

Villa A, Connell CL, Abati S (2014) Diagnosis and management of xerostomia and hyposalivation. Ther Clin Risk Manag 11:45–51CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Eisbruch A, Ship JA, Dawson LA, Kim HM et al. (2003) Salivary gland

Eisbruch A, Ship JA, Terrell JE, Martel MK, Kim M (1999) Assessment of the quality of life of patients with head and neck cancer irradiated with parotid sparing or standard techniques. Grant protocol # UMCC 9759.

Pellegrino F, Groff E, Bastiani L, Fattori B, Sotti G (2015) Assessment of radiation-induced xerostomia: validation of the Italian version of the xerostomia questionnaire in head and neck cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 23:925–932CrossRefPubMed

Langendijk JA, Doornaert P, Verdonack-de Leeuw IM, Leemans CR, Aaronson NK, Slotman BJ (2008) Impact of late treatment-related toxicity on quality of life among patients with head and neck cancer treated with radiotherapy. J Clin Oncol 26:3770–3776CrossRefPubMed

Eisbruch A, Hyungjin M, Terrell J, March L, Dawson L, Ship JA (2001) Xerostomia and its predictors following parotid-sparing irradiation of head and neck cancer. Head Neck 50:695–704

Cheng SCH, Wu VWC, Kwong DLW, Ying MTC (2011) Assessment of post-radiotherapy salivary gland. Br J Radiol 84:393–402CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Little M, Schipper M, Feng FY, Vineberg K, Cornwall C, Murdoch-Kinch AC, Eisbruch A (2012) Reducing xerostomia after chemo-IMRT for head and neck cancer: beyond sparing the parotid glands. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83:1007–1014CrossRefPubMed

Heutte N, Plisson L, Lange M, Prevost V, Babin E (2014) Quality of life tools in head and neck oncology. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 131:33–47CrossRefPubMed

10.

Meirovitz A, Murdoch-Kinch CA, Schipper M, Pan C, Eisbruch A (2006) Grading xerostomia by physicians or by patients after intensity-modulated radiotherapy of head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol 60(2):445–453CrossRef

11.

Eisbruch A, Rhodus N, Rosenthal D, Murphy B, Rasch C, Sonis S, Scarantino C, Brizel D (2003) How should we measure and report radiotherapy-induced xerostomia? Semin Radiat Oncol 13:226–234CrossRefPubMed

12.

Fox PC, Busch KA, Baum BJ (1987) Subjective reports of xerostomia and objective measures of salivary gland performance. J Am Dent Assoc 115:581–584CrossRefPubMed

13.

Thomas J, Nelson J (2003) Research Methods in Physical Activity. 3th ed. (editor of translation: karteroliotis k). Athens, Greece: Medical Publications Paschalidis.

14.

Henson RK, Roberts JK (2006) Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educ Psychol Meas 66:393–416CrossRef

15.

Miah AB, Gulliford SL, Morden J, Newbold KL, Bhide SA, Zaidi SH, Hall E, Harrington KJ, Nutting CM (2016) Recovery of Salivary Function: Contralateral Parotid-sparing Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy versus Bilateral Superficial Lobe Parotid-sparing Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol).(in press)

16.

Pacholke HD, Amdur RJ, Morris CG, Li JG, Dempsey JF, Hinerman RW, Mendenhall WM (2005) Late xerostomia after intensity modulated radiation therapy versus conventional radiotherapy. Am J Clin Oncol 28:351–358CrossRefPubMed

17.

Jabbari S, Kim HM, Feng M, Lin A, Tsien C, Elshaikh M, Terrel E, Murdoch-Kinch C, Eisbruch A (2005) Matched case-control study of quality of life and xerostomia after intensity-modulated radiotherapy or standard radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer: initial report. Int J Radiat Oncol 63:725–731CrossRef

18.

Chen XL, Qiu ZW, Gu MF, Su Y, Liu LZ, Liu Y, Mo CW, Xu Q, Sun J, Li DH (2014) Translation and validation of the Chinese version of the quality of life radiation therapy instrument and the head & neck module (QOL-RTI/H&N). Health Qual Life Outcomes 12:51CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Franzen L, Funegard U, Ericson T, Henriksson R (1992) Parotid gland function during and following radiotherapy of malignancies in the head and neck. Eur J Cancer 28:457–462CrossRefPubMed

20.

Citak E, Tulek Z (2013) Longitudinal quality of life in Turkish patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Support Care Cancer 21:2171–2183CrossRefPubMed

Title: Validity and reliability of the Greek version of the xerostomia questionnaire in head and neck cancer patients
Authors: Pinelopi Theopisti Memtsa
Maria Tolia
Ioannis Tzitzikas
Ioannis Bizakis
Kyriaki Pistevou-Gombaki
Martha Charalambidou
Chrysoula Iliopoulou
George Kyrgias
Publication date: 01-03-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-016-3471-0

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

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

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Mental and physical health correlates among family caregivers of patients with newly-diagnosed incurable cancer: a hierarchical linear regression analysis

Efficacy and safety of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during the first cycle of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in Korean patients with a broad range of tumor types

Unmet supportive care needs of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders with cancer: a prospective, longitudinal study

A good death from the perspective of palliative cancer patients

Participation in treatment decision-making among Chinese-Australian women with breast cancer

What circumstances lead to non-disclosure of cancer-related information in China? A qualitative study

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer