IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0286947.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of a French version of the Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool in cancer patients: Factorial structure, reliability and responsiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Elise Perceau-Chambard
  • Sylvain Roche
  • Colombe Tricou
  • Catherine Mercier
  • Cécile Barbaret
  • Andrew Davies
  • Katherine Webber
  • Marilène Filbet
  • Guillaume Pierre Serge Economos

Abstract

Objective: Breakthrough cancer pain should be properly assessed for better-personalized treatment plan. The Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool is a 14-item tool validated in English developed for this purpose; no French version is currently available and validated. This study aimed to translate it in French and assess the psychometric properties of a French version of the Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool (BAT-FR). Methods: First, translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the 14 items (9 ordinal and 5 nominal) of the original BAT tool in French language was made. Second, assessments of validity (convergent, divergent and discriminant validity), factorial structure (exploratory factor analysis) and test-retest reliability of the 9 ordinal items were done with data of 130 adult cancer patients suffering from breakthrough pain in a hospital-academic palliative care center. Test-retest reliability and responsiveness of total and dimension scores derived from these 9 items were also assessed. Acceptability of the 14 items was also assessed on the 130 patients. Results: The 14 items had good content and face validity. Convergent and divergent validity, discriminant validity and test-retest reliability of the ordinal items were acceptable. Test-retest reliability and responsiveness of total and dimensions derived from ordinal items were also acceptable. The factorial structure of the ordinal items had two dimensions similar to the original version: “1—pain severity and impact” and “2—pain duration and medication”. Items 2 and 8 had a low contribution to the dimension 1 they were assigned and item 14 clearly changed of dimension compared with the original tool. The acceptability of the 14 items was good. Conclusion: The BAT-FR has shown acceptable validity, reliability and responsiveness supporting its use for assessing breakthrough cancer pain in French-speaking populations. Its structure needs nevertheless further confirmation.

Suggested Citation

  • Elise Perceau-Chambard & Sylvain Roche & Colombe Tricou & Catherine Mercier & Cécile Barbaret & Andrew Davies & Katherine Webber & Marilène Filbet & Guillaume Pierre Serge Economos, 2023. "Validation of a French version of the Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool in cancer patients: Factorial structure, reliability and responsiveness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-15, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0286947
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286947
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0286947
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0286947&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0286947?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0286947. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.