Assessing the construct validity of the Italian version of the EQ-5D: preliminary results from a cross-sectional study in North Italy

BACKGROUND: Information on health related quality of life (HR-QOL) can be integrated with other classical health status indicators and be used to assist policy makers in resource allocation decisions. For this reason instruments such as the SF-12 and EQ-5D have been widely proposed as assessment tools to monitor changes in HR-QOL in general populations and very recently in general practice settings as well AIM: The primary goal of our study was to assess the construct validity of the Italian version of the EQ-5D in a general population of North Italy using socio-demographic factors and diagnostic sub-groups. Our secondary goal was to assess the concurrent validity of the EQ-5D and SF-12. METHODS: The SF-12, the EQ-5D plus an additional questionnaire on socio-demographic characteristics, clinical conditions and symptoms were completed by 1,622 adults, randomly selected from the Registry of the Health Authorities of the city of Bologna, Italy. The primary care physician of each subject was contacted to report on the subject's health status. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that the Italian version of the EQ-5D is well accepted by the general population (91% response rate), has good reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.73), and shows evidence of construct validity. CONCLUSION: Our data provide a basis for further research to be conducted to assess the validity of the EQ-5D in Italy. In particular future studies should focus on assessing its ability to detect a clinically important change in health related quality of life over time (responsiveness)

Perceived work ability at return to work in women treated for breast cancer: A questionnaire-based study

Background: Breast cancer survivors often perceive reduced work ability upon returning to work. Objectives: To identify predictors of perceived reduced work ability following return to work among women treated for breast cancer and to describe workplace interventions and support after returning to work. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to 18-65 years-old women (no. 1578) treated for breast cancer and residing in the catchment area of the Bologna Local Health Authority between 2010 and 2012. The study population was identified through a Hospital Discharge Database. The questionnaires included items about personal characteristics, cancer and work-related factors, perceived work ability and the return to work process. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of reduced work ability upon returning to work. Results: Among the 841 respondents, 503 questionnaires were evaluable. In the study, 43.5% of the respondents reported reduced work ability with respect to the pre-diagnosis period. Reduced work ability was more common in non-cohabiting (OR=1.81, 95%CI 1.10-2.98) than in cohabiting/ married women, and after mastectomy (OR=2.77, 95%CI 1.26-6.11) than after breast-conserving surgery. Office staff/sales assistants and managers were less likely to report reduced work ability (OR=0.51, 95%CI 0.30-0.88 and OR=0.21, 95%CI 0.06-0.76, respectively) than labourers. Women who perceived reduced work ability reported more frequently adjustment of work assignments, consultation of an occupational physician, insufficient support from employers and colleagues and discrimination. Conclusions: Reduced work ability is commonly perceived among women who return to work after treatment for breast cancer. Occupational physicians and general practitioners should be aware of a wide range of factors influencing this perception in order to facilitate a successful return to work

Advanced breast cancer rates in the epoch of service screening: The 400,000 women cohort study from Italy

Background The objective of this study was to evaluate if mammography screening attendance is associated with a reduction in late-stage breast cancer incidence. Methods The cohort included over 400,000 Italian women who were first invited to participate in regional screening programmes during the 1990s and were followed for breast cancer incidence for 13 years. We obtained individual data on their exposure to screening and correlated this with total and stage-specific breast cancer incidence. Socio-economic status and pre-screening incidence data were used to assess the presence of self-selection bias. Results Overall, screening attendance was associated with a 10% excess risk of in situ and invasive breast cancer (IRR = 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06â\u80\u931.14), which dropped to 5% for invasive cancers only (IRR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.01â\u80\u931.09). There were significant reductions among attenders for specific cancer stages; we observed a 39% reduction for T2 or larger (IRR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.57â\u80\u930.66), 19% for node positives (IRR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.76â\u80\u930.86) and 28% for stage II and higher (IRR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.68â\u80\u930.76). Our data suggest that the presence of self-selection bias is limited and, overall, invited women experienced a 17% reduction of advanced cancers compared with pre-screening rates. Conclusions Comparing attenders' and non-attenders' stage-specific breast cancer incidence, we have estimated that screening attendance is associated with a reduction of nearly 30% for stages II+

Impact of screening programme using the faecal immunochemical test on stage of colorectal cancer: Results from the IMPATTO study

To evaluate the impact of faecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening on stage distribution at diagnosis, and to estimate relative incidence rates by stage in screened at first and subsequent rounds vs. unscreened. We included all incident cases occurring in 2000–2008 in 50- to 71-year-olds residing in areas with an FIT-screening programme. Multinomial logistic models were computed to estimate the relative risk ratio (RRR) of stages I and IV, compared to stage II + III, adjusting for age, sex, geographical area, and incidence year. Proportions were then used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) by stage for screened subjects at the first and at subsequent rounds vs. unscreened subjects, applying the expected changes in overall incidence during screening phases. 11,663 cancers were included: 5965 in not-invited and 5,698 in invited subjects, 3,425 of whom attendees. Compared to not-invited, invited subjects had RRR 2.04 (95% CI: 1.84; 2.46) of stage I and RRR 0.77 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.87) of stage IV. Differences were stronger comparing attendees vs. nonattendees. Interval cancers were more frequently stage I compared to non-invited (RRR 1.54; 95% CI: 1.15; 2.04), but there was no difference for stage IV. IRRs in screened at first round vs. unscreened were 4.6 (95% CI: 4.2; 5.1), 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3; 1.5) and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.6; 0.9) for stages I, II + III and IV, respectively; in the following rounds the IRRs of screened vs. unscreened were 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2; 1.6), 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7; 0.9) and 0.3 (95% CI: 0.1; 0.4) for stages I, II + III and IV, respectively. FIT screening reduces the incidence of metastatic cancers by about 70% after the first round