Development and psychometric evaluation of the Endometriosis Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire.
ABSTRACT To develop and psychometrically evaluate the Endometriosis Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, a patient-reported assessment of satisfaction with endometriosis treatment.
The Endometriosis Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire was developed based on the results of five focus groups and three iterative sets of cognitive interviews along with expert opinion and a review of the literature. The psychometric properties were assessed using data collected during a multicenter, randomized, proof-of-concept trial. The development and validation processes followed the guidance recommended by the United States FDA for patient-reported outcome instruments.
The Endometriosis Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire's reliability, validity, and utility as a measure of patient satisfaction with their endometriosis treatment were supported. The results of the item-level analyses showed no evidence of distributional anomalies or response scale biases. The Endometriosis Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire is unidimensional, has excellent internal consistency reliability, and discriminates well between known groups. Scores correlated well with other patient-reported outcome measures of endometriosis without being redundant.
The Endometriosis Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire has utility for assessing patient satisfaction with endometriosis treatment and may be useful in clinical trials that are assessing new treatments for endometriosis, especially when deciding between competing treatments or regimens that are found to have similar tolerability and efficacy.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although recommended for use in studies investigating falls in the elderly, the European Quality of Life Group instrument, EQ-5D, has not been widely used to assess the impact of falls on quality of life. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of single and frequent falls with EQ-5D rated quality of life in a sample of German community-dwelling seniors in primary care suffering a variety of concurrent chronic diseases and conditions. In a cross-sectional study, a sample of community-dwelling seniors aged >= 72 years was interviewed by means of a standardised telephone interview. According to the number of self-reported falls within twelve months prior to interview, participants were categorised into one of three fall categories: no fall vs. one fall vs. two or more falls within twelve months. EQ-5D values as well as other characteristics were compared across the fall categories. Adjustments for a variety of concurrent chronic diseases and conditions and further variables were made by using multiple linear regression analysis, with EQ-5D being the target variable. In total, 1,792 participants (median age 77 years; 53% female) were analysed. The EQ-5D differed between fall categories. Participants reporting no fall had a mean EQ-5D score of 81.1 (standard deviation [s.d.]: 15.4, median: 78.3), while participants reporting one fall (n = 265; 14.8%) and participants with two or more falls (n = 117; 6.5%) had mean total scores of 77.0 (s.d.: 15.8, median: 78.3; mean difference to participants without a fall: -4.1, p < 0.05) and 72.1 (s.d.: 17.6, median: 72.5; mean difference: -9.0, p < 0.05), respectively. The mean difference between participants with one fall and participants with two or more falls was -4.9 (p < 0.05). Under adjustment for a variety of chronic diseases and conditions, the mean decrease in the total EQ-5D score was about -1.0 score point for one fall and about -2.5 points for two or more falls within twelve months. In quantity, this decrease is comparable to other chronic diseases adjusted for. Among the variables with the greatest negative association with EQ-5D ratings in multivariate analysis were depression and fear of falling. The findings suggest that falls are negatively associated with EQ-5D rated quality of life independent of a variety of chronic diseases and conditions.Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 01/2014; 12(1):2. DOI:10.1186/1477-7525-12-2 · 2.10 Impact FactorThis article is viewable in ResearchGate's enriched formatRG Format enables you to read in context with side-by-side figures, citations, and feedback from experts in your field.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Satisfaction with treatment is a patient-reported outcome shown to be associated with the patient's health-related decisions and treatment-related behavior, thereby influencing the chances of successful treatment, and is especially relevant in long-term treatment, such as allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the psychometric properties of the Satisfaction Scale for Patients Receiving Allergen Immunotherapy (ESPIA) questionnaire so as to determine the satisfaction of patients receiving AIT treatment. METHODS: An observational, longitudinal, multicenter study was performed on patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) undergoing AIT treatment. Sociodemographic, clinical, and patient-centered health outcomes data were gathered at the study visits. Feasibility, reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of the prevalidated version of the ESPIA questionnaire were assessed. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty-nine patients were included (52.2% women, 33.6 years of age, 54.5% of the cases with intermittent AR and 62.5% with moderate AR). Low levels of missing items and ceiling/floor effects were found for the overall score of the ESPIA questionnaire. The overall Cronbach α value and intraclass correlation coefficient were 0.90 and 0.92, respectively. The overall score for the ESPIA questionnaire was strongly associated with months receiving AIT, AR type and intensity, presence of conjunctivitis, self-perceived health status, effect of AR on daily life, and expectations about the AIT treatment. The pattern of correlations obtained with other patient-centered health outcomes was consistent with expectations. The ESPIA questionnaire also showed good sensitivity to change for improved health status. CONCLUSION: The ESPIA questionnaire to assess patient satisfaction with respect to AIT treatment presented satisfactory psychometric properties for its use in clinical practice.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 01/2013; 131(6). DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.11.049 · 12.05 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Endometriosis is prevalent and women need high-quality care, which should be patient-centered. This study aimed to develop a valid and reliable patient-centeredness questionnaire, based on a defined concept of patient-centered endometriosis care (PCEC). A literature review, focus groups (FGs) with patients and an expert panel defined PCEC with 10 dimensions. The ENDOCARE questionnaire (ECQ) was developed. FGs resulted in 43 specific statements covering the 10 dimensions of PCEC, for which the ECQ measured 'importance' and 'performance'. Medical and demographic questions and an open question were added. The Dutch ECQ questionnaire was piloted and reciprocally translated into English and Italian. Patients with endometriosis from Belgium, The Netherlands, Italy and the UK were invited to complete the ECQ online. Item analysis, inter-item analysis and confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and reliability analysis were performed. The theory-driven dimensions were adapted. The ECQ was completed by 541 patients. Based on item analysis, five statements were deleted. Factor analysis was performed on 322 questionnaires (only from respondents with a partner). Insights from the data-driven EFA suggested adaptations of the theory-driven dimensions. The reliability statistics of 9/10 adapted theory-driven dimensions were satisfactory and the root mean square error of approximation was good. This study resulted in a valid and reliable instrument to measure PCEC. For data presentation, the adapted theory-driven dimensions of PCEC are preferred over the data-driven factors. The ECQ may serve to benchmark patient-centeredness, conduct cross-cultural European research and set targets for improvement.Human Reproduction 09/2011; 26(11):2988-99. DOI:10.1093/humrep/der277 · 4.59 Impact Factor