37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) scale: a revised scale for contemporary palliative care clinical practice [ISRCTN81117481]

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) is a gold standard scale. The Thorne-modified KPS (TKPS) focuses on community-based care and has been shown to be more relevant to palliative care settings than the original KPS. The Australia-modified KPS (AKPS) blends KPS and TKPS to accommodate any setting of care.

          Methods

          Performance status was measured using all three scales for palliative care patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial in South Australia. Care occurred in a range of settings. Survival was defined from enrollment to death.

          Results

          Ratings were collected at 1600 timepoints for 306 participants. The median score on all scales was 60. KPS and AKPS agreed in 87% of ratings; 79% of disagreements occurred within 1 level on the 11-level scales. KPS and TKPS agreed in 76% of ratings; 85% of disagreements occurred within one level. AKPS and TKPS agreed in 85% of ratings; 87% of disagreements were within one level. Strongest agreement occurred at the highest levels (70–90), with greatest disagreement at lower levels (≤40). Kappa coefficients for agreement were KPS-TKPS 0.71, KPS-AKPS 0.84, and AKPS-TKPS 0.82 (all p < 0.001). Spearman correlations with survival were KPS 0.26, TKPS 0.27 and AKPS 0.26 (all p < 0.001). AKPS was most predictive of survival at the lower range of the scale. All had longitudinal test-retest validity. Face validity was greatest for the AKPS.

          Conclusion

          The AKPS is a useful modification of the KPS that is more appropriate for clinical settings that include multiple venues of care such as palliative care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading.

          When comparing a new method of measurement with a standard method, one of the things we want to know is whether the difference between the measurements by the two methods is related to the magnitude of the measurement. A plot of the difference against the standard measurement is sometimes suggested, but this will always appear to show a relation between difference and magnitude when there is none. A plot of the difference against the average of the standard and new measurements is unlikely to mislead in this way. We show this theoretically and by a practical example.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale. An examination of its reliability and validity in a research setting.

            The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale (KPS) is widely used to quantify the functional status of cancer patients. However, limited data exist documenting its reliability and validity. The KPS is used in the National Hospice Study (NHS) as both a study eligibility criterion and an outcome measure. As part of intensive training, interviewers were instructed in and tested on guidelines for determining the KPS levels of patients. After 4 months of field experience, interviewers were again tested based on narrative patient descriptions. The interrator reliability of 47 NHS interviewers was found to be 0.97. The construct validity of the KPS was analyzed, and the KPS was found to be strongly related (P less than 0.001) to two other independent measures of patient functioning. Finally, the relationship of the KPS to longevity (r = 0.30) in a population of terminal cancer patients documents its predictive validity. These findings suggest the utility of the KPS as a valuable research tool when employed by trained observers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evaluation of patients with advanced cancer using the Karnofsky performance status.

              The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale (KPS) was designed to measure the level of patient activity and medical care requirements. It is a general measure of patient independence and has been widely used as a general assessment of patient with cancer. Although there is a long history of use of the KPS for judging cancer patients, its reliability and validity have been assumed without formal investigation. The interrater reliability of the KPS was investigated in two ways, both of which gave evidence of moderately high reliability. The patients evaluated in their home were usually assigned a lower KPS score compared with a similar evaluation at the same time done in the outpatient clinic. Costruct validity of the KPS was demonstrated by strong correlation with several variables relating to physical function. On-study KPS score accurately predicted early death, but high initial KPS scores did not necessarily predict long survival. Patient deterioration with subsequent death within a few months could be predicted to a limited extent by a rapidly dropping KPS. These results suggest that the KPS has considerable validity as a global indicator of the functional status of patients with cancer and might be helpful for following other patients with chronic disease.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Palliat Care
                BMC Palliative Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-684X
                2005
                12 November 2005
                : 4
                : 7
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Palliative and Supportive Services, Division of Medicine, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia
                [2 ]Southern Adelaide Palliative Services, Repatriation General Hospital, Daw Park, South Australia, Australia
                [3 ]Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
                [4 ]North Tasmanian Palliative Care Service, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia
                Article
                1472-684X-4-7
                10.1186/1472-684X-4-7
                1308820
                16283937
                0d6d10d1-3aff-46cf-a0f4-7ffbc50273f7
                Copyright © 2005 Abernethy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 19 May 2005
                : 12 November 2005
                Categories
                Research Article

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                Anesthesiology & Pain management

                Comments

                Comment on this article