• Ingrid de Kock, Mehrnoush Mirhosseini, Francis Lau, Vincent Thai, Michael Downing, Hue Quan, Mary Lesperance, and Ju Yang.
• Division of Palliative Care Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton Zone Palliative Care Program, Grey Nuns Community Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
• J Palliat Care. 2013 Jan 1;29(3):163-9.

AimThe aim of our study was to assess whether the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status, and the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) are interchangeable individually or within two prognostic tools: the Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) and the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI).MethodsWe performed a subset analysis of a prospective comparative study of functional and prognostic tools and clinician prediction of survival. We studied 955 patients with advanced life-limiting illnesses (cancer and noncancer) in the acute care and community settings. We used a descriptive statistical model and Spearman's rank correlation to assess these interchangeabilities.ResultsThere is a direct positive linear relationship between the KPS and the PPS, and a direct negative linear relationship between these tools and the ECOG. Exchange of the KPS and the PPS was possible within the PaP and the PPI.ConclusionThe PPS and the KPS can be used interchangeably as functional tools and within prognostic tools. The ECOG is interchangeable with the PPS and the KPS, but this interchangeability is population-specific.

14 keywords...

hide…