Measures of financial toxicity in cancer survivors: a systematic review

• Published in: Supportive care in cancer Vol. 32; no. 7; p. 403
• Main Authors: Thomy, L. B., Crichton, M., Jones, L., Yates, P. M., Hart, N. H., Collins, L. G., Chan, R. J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.07.2024; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Cancer; Cancer Survivors - psychology; Cost of Illness; Humans; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neoplasms; Nursing; Nursing Research; Oncology; Pain Medicine; Psychometrics; Quality of Life; Quantitative psychology; Rehabilitation Medicine; Reproducibility of Results; Review; Survivor; Systematic review; Toxicity; Financial toxicity; Psychometrics; Distress; Hardship; Cancer
• ISSN: 0941-4355; 1433-7339
• DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08601-4

Purpose Comprehensive cancer-related financial toxicity (FT) measures as a multidimensional construct are lacking. The aims of this systematic review were to (1) identify full measures designed explicitly for assessing FT and evaluate their psychometric properties (content validity, structural validity, reliability, and other measurement properties) using Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN), and (2) provide an analysis of the domains of FT covered in these measures. Methods MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for quantitative studies published from January 2000 to July 2023 that reported psychometric properties of FT measures in cancer survivors. The psychometric properties of FT measures and study risk of bias were analysed using COSMIN. Each FT measure was compared against the six domains of FT recommended by Witte and colleagues. Results were synthesized narratively. The detailed search strategies are available in Table S1. Results Six FT tools including the COST-FACIT, PROFFIT, FIT, SFDQ, HARDS, and ENRICh-Spanish were identified. The COST-FACIT measure had good measurement properties. No measure reached an excellent level for overall quality but was mostly rated as sufficient. The SFDQ, HARDS, and ENRICh-Spanish were the most comprehensive in the inclusion of the six domains of FT. Conclusion This review emphasizes the need for validated multidimensional FT measures that can be applied across various cancer types, healthcare settings, and cultural backgrounds. Furthermore, a need to develop practical screening tools with high predictive ability for FT is highly important, considering the significant consequences of FT. Addressing these gaps in future research will further enhance the understanding of FT.