LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Measurement and Validation of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) in a Population With Diabetes.

Photo from wikipedia

OBJECTIVE The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (COST-FACIT) is a validated instrument measuring financial distress among people with cancer. The reliability and construct validity of… Click to show full abstract

OBJECTIVE The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (COST-FACIT) is a validated instrument measuring financial distress among people with cancer. The reliability and construct validity of the 11-item COST-FACIT were examined in adults with diabetes and high A1C. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We examined the factor structure (exploratory factor analysis), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach α), floor/ceiling effects, known-groups validity, and predictive validity among a sample of 600 adults with diabetes and high A1C. RESULTS The COST-FACIT demonstrated a two-factor structure with high internal consistency: general financial situation (7-items, α = 0.86) and impact of illness on financial situation (4-items, α = 0.73). The measure demonstrated a ceiling effect for 2% of participants and floor effects for 7%. Worse financial toxicity scores were observed among adults who were women, were below the poverty line, had government-sponsored health insurance, were middle-aged, were not in the workforce, and had less educational attainment (P < 0.01). Worse financial toxicity was observed for those engaging in cost coping behaviors, such as taking less or skipping medicines, delaying care, borrowing money, "maxing out" the limit on credit cards, and not paying bills (P < 0.01). In regression models for the full measure and its two factors, worse financial toxicity was correlated with higher A1C (P < 0.01), higher levels of diabetes distress (P < 0.01), more chronic conditions (P < 0.01), and more depressive symptoms (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Findings support both the reliability and validity of the COST-FACIT among adults with diabetes and high A1C levels. More research is needed to support the use of the COST-FACIT tool as a clinically relevant patient-centered instrument for diabetes care.

Keywords: score financial; financial toxicity; cost; cost facit; comprehensive score

Journal Title: Diabetes care
Year Published: 2022

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.