4.5 Article

Validation of the German version of the brief fatigue inventory

Journal

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages 449-458

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0885-3924(03)00073-3

Keywords

fatigue; assessment; validation; cancer pain; noncancer pain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sedation and tiredness are among the most frequent symptoms among cancer patients. A detailed assessment of these symptoms is necessary to evaluate therapeutic effects, such as the use of methylphenidate or comparison of diffffent opioids. The Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) has been validated as a short and comprehensive instrument to assess severity of fatigue and fatigue-related impairment in cancer patients. We validated the German version of the BFI in patients with chronic cancer-related and noncancer-related Pain treated in a tertiary pain center. Patients treated in the Pain Clinic of the Department of Anesthesiology completed the BFI, the minimal documentation system (MIDOS) and the short form SF-36 quality-of-life questionnaire (SV-36). Test-retest reliability was assessed with a second BFI immediately after the consultation and in a subgroup of patients after 3 to 7 days. Nineteen percent of the 117 patients were treated for cancer-related pain (C); the other patients suffered from chronic severe pain of nonmalignant origin (NC). Patients reported mean values for average fatigue of 3.9 (C) and 4.9 (NC), and for worst fatigue of 5.5 (C) and 62 (NC). The mean score of the 6 impairment items was 4.3 in both groups. Factor analysis led to a solution with one common factor for all nine items. Fatigue on the BFI correlated highly with feeling tired' in the SF-36 and with 'sedation' in MIDOS, and less with 'being worn out' in SF-36 and 'weakness' in MIDOS. Internal consistency was high, as was test-retest reliability, with a correlation of the intensity, mean scores of 0.93 and the impairment mean scores of 0.87. In conclusion, we found the German version of the BFI to be reliable and valid for cancer and noncancer patients. Minor differences were seen in the validation compared to the original version. (C) 2003 U.S. CancerPain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier. All fight reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available