Article

Generic and diabetes-specific well-being in the AT.LANTUS Follow-on study: further psychometric validation of the W-BQ28 indicates its utility in research and clinical practice in Type 2 diabetes in the UK.

AHP Research, Hornchurch, UK.
Diabetic Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.24). 04/2012; 29(9):e345-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03702.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To undertake further psychometric validation of the W-BQ28 to determine its suitability for use in adults with Type 2 diabetes in the UK using data from the AT.LANTUS follow-on study.
A total of 353 people with Type 2 diabetes participated in the AT.LANTUS Follow-on study, completing measures of well-being (W-BQ28), treatment satisfaction (DTSQ) and self-care (SCI-R). Confirmatory factor analyses was used to confirm the W-BQ28 structure and internal consistency reliability was assessed. Additional statistical tests were conducted to explore convergent, divergent and known-groups validity. Minimal important differences were calculated using distribution and anchor-based techniques.
Structure of the W-BQ28 (seven four-item subscales plus 16-item generic and 12-item diabetes-specific scales) was confirmed (comparative fit index = 0.917, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.057). Internal consistency reliability was satisfactory (four-item subscales: alpha = 0.73-0.90; 12/16-item scales: α = 0.84-0.90). Convergent validity was supported by expected moderate to high correlations (r(s) = 0.35-0.67) between all W-BQ28 subscales (except Energy); divergent validity was supported by expected low to moderate correlations with treatment satisfaction (r(s) = -0.03-0.52) and self-care (r(s) = 0.02-0.22). Known-groups validity was supported with statistically significant differences by sex, age and HbA(1c) for expected subscales. Minimal important differences were established (range 0.14-2.90).
The W-BQ28 is a valid and reliable measure of generic and diabetes-specific well-being in Type 2 diabetes in the UK. Confirmation of the utility of W-BQ28 (including establishment of minimal important differences) means that its use is indicated in research and clinical practice.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
97 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Psychological outcome measures of Well-being and Treatment Satisfaction have been designed and developed for people with tablet-treated Type 2 diabetes. The Well-being scale includes three six-item sub-scales to measure Depression, Anxiety, and Positive Well-being. A prime consideration when selecting items for the psychological well-being measures was to minimize the confounding of diabetic symptomatology with the somatic symptoms of depression and anxiety. Cronbach's alpha indicated that each of the Well-being sub-scales and the Treatment Satisfaction scale was internally reliable (alphas ranged from 0.70 to 0.88) and evidence for construct validity was provided by predicted associations with other variables collected at the time of the study. For example, lower Well-being scores were associated with being overweight (Depression: p less than 0.05; Anxiety: p less than 0.001) while greater Satisfaction with Treatment was associated with lower HbA1 levels (p less than 0.001) and lower percent ideal body weight (p less than 0.01). These scales should prove particularly useful where measures of quality of life are required to complement metabolic variables when evaluating new treatments, education programmes, and other interventions, or in the routine auditing of established methods of treatment.
    Diabetic Medicine 07/1990; 7(5):445-51. · 3.06 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate whether monitoring and discussing psychological well-being in outpatients with diabetes improves mood, glycemic control, and the patient's evaluation of the quality of diabetes care. This study was a randomized controlled trial of 461 outpatients with diabetes who were randomly assigned to standard care or to the monitoring condition. In the latter group, the diabetes nurse specialist assessed and discussed psychological well-being with the patient (with an interval of 6 months) in addition to standard care. The computerized Well-being Questionnaire was used for this purpose. Primary outcomes were mood, HbA(1c), and the patient's evaluation of the quality of diabetes care at 1-year follow-up. The number of referrals to the psychologist was analyzed as a secondary outcome. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. The monitoring group reported better mood compared with the standard care group, as indicated by significantly lower negative well-being and significantly higher levels of energy, higher general well-being, better mental health, and a more positive evaluation of the quality of the emotional support received from the diabetes nurse. The two groups did not differ for HbA(1c) or in their overall evaluation of the quality of diabetes care. In the monitoring condition, significantly more subjects were referred to the psychologist. Monitoring and discussing psychological well-being as part of routine diabetes outpatient care had favorable effects on the mood of patients but did not affect their HbA(1c). Our results support the recommendation to monitor psychological well-being in patients with diabetes.
    Diabetes Care 12/2001; 24(11):1929-35. · 8.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Normed and nonnormed fit indexes are frequently used as adjuncts to chi-square statistics for evaluating the fit of a structural model. A drawback of existing indexes is that they estimate no known population parameters. A new coefficient is proposed to summarize the relative reduction in the noncentrality parameters of two nested models. Two estimators of the coefficient yield new normed (CFI) and nonnormed (FI) fit indexes. CFI avoids the underestimation of fit often noted in small samples for Bentler and Bonett's (1980) normed fit index (NFI). FI is a linear function of Bentler and Bonett's non-normed fit index (NNFI) that avoids the extreme underestimation and overestimation often found in NNFI. Asymptotically, CFI, FI, NFI, and a new index developed by Bollen are equivalent measures of comparative fit, whereas NNFI measures relative fit by comparing noncentrality per degree of freedom. All of the indexes are generalized to permit use of Wald and Lagrange multiplier statistics. An example illustrates the behavior of these indexes under conditions of correct specification and misspecification. The new fit indexes perform very well at all sample sizes.
    Psychological Bulletin 04/1990; 107(2):238-46. · 14.39 Impact Factor