JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and the BOMET-QOL quality of life questionnaires in patients with bone metastases.

AIMS: Bone metastases are a common complication of advanced cancer and often result in a decrease in patients' quality of life. Very few specific modules have been created to accurately assess quality of life in this patient group. The purpose of this study was to compare two questionnaires, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire for patients with bone metastases (EORTC QLQ-BM22) and the bone metastases quality of life questionnaire (BOMET-QOL.

METHODS: A literature search was conducted in Medline, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Embase and Embase Classic to identify studies that discussed the development, validation and reliability of the (EORTC) QLQ-BM22 and the BOMET-QOL. Studies that discussed the development and validity of the questionnaire along with studies using these tools were included.

RESULTS: Both questionnaires were developed in collaboration with patients and health-care professionals. The QLQ-BM22 is over twice the length of the BOMET-QOL, with 22 questions as compared to 10. The QLQ-BM22 has four subscales while the BOMET-QOL has no subscales. The QLQ-BM22 gives a more in-depth analysis of symptoms and well-being and includes issues such as mobility, side effects, complications of treatment and dependency. The BOMET-QOL is shorter and gives an overall assessment of pain and mobility. Scoring, item format, organization and response options vary between the questionnaires but the recall period for both is the previous week. Both questionnaires have been determined valid and reliable.

CONCLUSION: The QLQ-BM22 and the BOMET-QOL are designed specifically for patients with bone metastases and each has strengths and weaknesses. Use of one over the other is ultimately dependent on trial design and investigators' goals.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app