Validity and reliability of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for non‐cancer patients

Abstract

AimThis study assessed the validity and reliability of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for non‐cancer patients.MethodsWe recruited 223 non‐cancer patients receiving palliative care and their healthcare providers (222) across two home care facilities and two hospitals for a cross‐sectional study. We assessed the construct validity and known‐group validity of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale. The weighted kappa and interclass correlation coefficients were assessed to ascertain reliability.ResultsThe scale scores were significantly higher for the ‘non‐stable’ group (worsening condition group) measured in the palliative care phase than for the ‘stable’ group (P < 0.001). Regarding validity, Spearman's correlations between similar items on the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System ranged from 0.61 to 0.94. Regarding reliability, the weighted kappa coefficients ranged from 0.53 to 0.81 for patients and from 0.58 to 0.90 for healthcare providers. For inter‐rater reliability between patients and healthcare providers, the weighted kappa coefficients for each item ranged from 0.03 to 0.42.ConclusionThis study confirmed the validity and reliability of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for non‐cancer patients requiring palliative care. However, the inter‐rater reliability indicates poor agreement between the assessments of patients and healthcare providers. This highlights the discrepancies between both their assessments and the importance of the patient's assessment. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2023; 23: 517–523.