[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background
To date, there is no global consensus on the definition of the severity of psoriasis. The REFlective evaLuation of psoriasis Efficacy of Treatment and Severity (REFLETS) questionnaire has recently been developed to provide a better understanding of plaque-type psoriasis severity and treatment efficacy from both patient and clinician perspectives.Objective
This study aimed to develop and psychometrically validate the new REFLETS questionnaire to evaluate patient and clinician perceptions of plaque-type psoriasis severity and treatment efficacy.Methods
Two similar versions of the REFLETS questionnaire were developed following a rigorous methodology for clinicians and patients, referring to ‘the psoriasis of your patient' or to ‘your psoriasis’, respectively. An observational, longitudinal, multicentre study was conducted in France with 34 dermatologists and 430 mild to severe plaque-type psoriasis patients to finalize the questionnaire and evaluate its psychometric properties.ResultsTwo dimensions were defined – severity and treatment efficacy – with three subdimensions within severity (impact of psoriasis, symptoms and disease course), and two individual items on joint pain. The questionnaire was well accepted by clinicians and patients. Excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.66–0.98) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.83–0.94) were demonstrated. REFLETS scores were moderately to highly correlated to Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (r = 0.35–0.70), Skindex-29 (r = 0.46–0.82) and DLQI scores (r = 0.36–0.82). Patients with decreased psoriasis severity and those with increased treatment efficacy, according to patient global evaluations, had lower severity and higher treatment efficacy REFLETS scores, respectively.ConclusionREFlective evaLuation of psoriasis Efficacy of Treatment and Severity is a promising tool for assessing plaque-type psoriasis severity and treatment efficacy from patient and clinician perspectives. It may help to improve patient and clinician communication in treatment decision making.
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 06/2014; · 2.69 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We developed and validated a specific 12-item questionnaire to evaluate adherence to oral antiresorptive medication by post-menopausal osteoporotic women in everyday practice. Over the following 9 months, an index of ≤16 was associated with an increase in the risk of treatment discontinuation of 1.69 and of 2.10 for new patients who had started treatment within the previous year.
Adherence to medication in osteoporosis is poor. The goal of this study was to develop and validate a disease-specific questionnaire to evaluate adherence to treatment of women with post-menopausal osteoporosis taking oral antiresorptive medication.
A prototype adherence questionnaire with 45 items developed from patient interview, literature review, and physician opinion was evaluated in a sample of 350 post-menopausal women with osteoporosis treated in primary care. Item responses were matched against scores on the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS). The most discriminant items were retained in the final questionnaire. Concurrent and predictive validity were assessed.
Twelve items were associated with MMAS score at a probability level of 0.05. These were retained in the final questionnaire which provided an adherence index ranging from 0 to 22. An index of ≥20 was associated with a high probability of persistence and an index ≤ 16 with a high probability of treatment discontinuation in the following 9 months.
The ADEOS-12 is a simple patient-reported measure to determine adherence to osteoporosis treatments with good concurrent and discriminant validity. This is the first disease-specific adherence measure to have been developed for osteoporosis.
Osteoporosis International 04/2011; 23(2):445-55. · 4.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Management of patients with Alzheimer's Disease (AD) can exert a substantial burden upon caregivers. As new modes of treatment administration are developed, it is important to assess caregiver satisfaction and preference in a standardized manner. This study describes the development of the Alzheimer's Disease Caregiver Preference Questionnaire (ADCPQ) to assess AD caregivers' satisfaction with and preference for patch or capsule treatments in AD patients.
Twenty-five published articles (1987-2002) were reviewed to identify potential ADCPQ domains. Three caregiver focus groups (n=24) were conducted to develop a first draft of the questionnaire. After evaluating the acceptance of ADCPQ to caregivers through in-depth interviews (n=10), its psychometric properties were assessed using data from 986 patients enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, four-arm, placebo- and active-controlled, 24-week trial.
Focus groups indicated that caregivers expressed dissatisfaction with current AD treatment routines including limitations related to: efficacy, administration schedule, number of pills, adherence to treatment, side effects, and taking pills. In-depth interviews with caregivers found the ADCPQ to be comprehensible with an acceptable layout. The resultant ADCPQ comprises three modules: A) baseline, 11 items assessing treatment expectations; B) week 8, 33 items on satisfaction and preferences with treatment options; C) week 24, 10 items assessing overall opinions of treatment options. Missing data per item was low (<or=0.3%) and domain internal consistency reliability was good (0.71-0.91). Preference items were also valid when evaluating concordance and discordance between convenience and satisfaction patch and capsule domain scores.
AD treatment puts a significant strain on caregivers. New modes of treatment delivery may be less burdensome to caregivers, thereby increasing satisfaction and potential treatment adherence. The ADCPQ was well accepted by AD caregivers and its domains demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties. The ADCPQ is a useful tool to understand caregiver preferences for patch versus oral therapies in AD.
Advances in Therapy 07/2009; 26(6):627-44. · 2.44 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To evaluate distance and near vision-related benefit after implantation of ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) following cataract surgery.
Two prospective open-labeled nonrandomized studies were pooled. Patients' perception of benefit was assessed with the TyPE, administered at baseline and after each eye surgery.
A total of 499 patients received ReSTOR IOLs, and 173 received monofocal IOLs. The distance vision of monofocal and ReSTOR patients improved equally with and without glasses. A greater improvement in near vision without glasses was reported by ReSTOR-implanted patients as early as after the 1st eye surgery (p < 0.0001). More ReSTOR patients than monofocal patients reported independence from glasses after the 1st eye surgery (64 vs. 52%; p = 0.0002). This difference had increased after the 2nd eye surgery (85 vs. 51%; p < 0.0001).
The improvement in near vision without glasses was significantly more evident in ReSTOR patients, allowing the majority of them to be free of glasses.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Restoration of functional distance and near vision independently of additional correction remains a goal for cataract surgery. ReSTOR, a new multi-focal intraocular lens (IOL) addresses this issue with an improvement in both distance and near vision, often without need for glasses. This analysis attempted to discuss the patient-reported benefit of ReSTOR using a full but organised representation of data.
Two non-randomised, open-label clinical trials conducted in Europe and the United-States were conducted to compare the efficacy of ReSTOR to AcrySof mono-focal IOLs. A total of 710 patients in need of bilateral cataract extraction were included in the pooled study. The TyPE, a patient questionnaire, was fully completed by 672 of them before and after each eye surgery. The TyPE, composed of 67 items measuring overall visual functioning in both conditions (with and without wearing glasses), evaluates limitations, troubles and satisfaction in distance and near vision. A principal component analysis (PCA) of the TyPE questionnaire was performed on pooled data from baseline and post-surgery observations in order to fully represent the change in the TyPE data over time. ReSTOR and mono-focal groups were used as illustrative variables. The coordinates of the first 2 factors were compared between visits and between IOLs (ReSTOR vs. mono-focal), using paired t-tests and t-tests, respectively.
The first factor of the PCA explained 55% of the variance and represented 'visual functioning and patient satisfaction'. The second factor explained 6% of the variance and was interpreted as 'independence from glasses'. An overall difference in factorial coordinates in both factors was seen between baseline and the first eye surgery, and between the first and the second eye surgery. No difference between ReSTOR and mono-focal IOL groups was observed at baseline. After surgery, ReSTOR treated-patients had higher coordinates on both "visual functioning and satisfaction" and "independence from glasses" factors. Findings observed on the factorial plan were supported by statistical comparisons of factorial coordinates.
Both mono-focal and ReSTOR-implanted patients improved their visual functioning after bilateral cataract surgery. Moreover, ReSTOR patients reported an additional benefit in independence from glasses as well as in visual functioning and patient satisfaction.
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 02/2008; 6:10. · 2.10 Impact Factor