Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes最新文献

Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in women. Patient-reported outcome measures are used to evaluate patients' health-related quality of life in clinical breast cancer studies. This study evaluated the structure, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) subscales in a clinical trial featuring patients with advanced/metastatic breast cancer (aBC), and estimated NFBSI-16 meaningful change thresholds.

Methods: Data from 101 patients with aBC enrolled in a phase II trial (Xenera-1) were included for psychometric evaluation of the NFBSI-16. Subscale structure was evaluated by assessing inter-item correlations, item-total correlations, and internal consistency (cycles 2 and 5). Validity was assessed using scale-level convergent validity (cycles 2 and 5) and known-groups (Baseline). Reliability was analysed via test-retest at cycles 3-4, and responsiveness to improvement and worsening was evaluated at cycles 5, 7, and 9. Meaningful change thresholds were estimated using anchor-based methods (supported by distribution-based methods) at cycles 5, 7, and 9.

Results: NFBSI-16 internal consistency was acceptable, but item-total correlations suggested that its subscales and the GP5 item (side-effect of treatment) scores may be preferred over a total score. Convergent and known-groups evidence supported NFBSI-16 validity. Test-retest reliability was good to excellent for Total and DRS-P (disease-related symptoms: physical) scales, and moderate for the GP5 item. Responsiveness to worsening was generally demonstrated, but responsiveness to improvement could not be demonstrated due to limited observed improvement. Anchor-based meaningful change thresholds were estimated for DRS-P and Total scores.

Conclusion: This study provides evidence that the NFBSI-16 has desirable psychometric properties for use in clinical studies in aBC. It also provides estimates of group- and individual-level meaningful change thresholds to facilitate score interpretation in future aBC research.

Background: The Otology Questionnaire Amsterdam (OQUA) is developed to evaluate multiple ear complaints and their impact on patients' daily lives. The current clinical use of this questionnaire is below the potential utilization.

Aim: To identify the barriers and enablers of using the OQUA as perceived by ENT surgeons and patients and provide recommendations for an implementation strategy.

Methods: Prospective and qualitative analysis was performed using focus groups and interviews with ENT professionals (n = 15) and patients (n = 25) with ear complaints of one tertiary referral hospital and two regional hospitals. Barriers and enablers were identified and classified by using the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Suggestions for an implementation strategy will be made accordingly.

Results: ENT professionals' barriers included lack of knowledge and skills to use the OQUA, inadequate technological support and perceived time constraints during consultation, uncertainty about the clinical relevance and lack of feedback on the outcomes of the OQUA. Enablers included beneficial consequences of the OQUA for the professional, organization and science. Patients' barriers included lack of knowledge about the objective and usefulness of the OQUA, perceived burden, difficulties in completing the questionnaire and insufficient feedback during consultation. Patient enablers included beliefs about beneficial consequences of the OQUA for the patient, health care and society. Suggested interventions involved education, training, environmental restructuring and incentivisation.

Conclusion: Based on the findings, we propose an implementation strategy should focus on education and training about the objective, outcomes and relevance of the OQUA, environmental restructuring regarding the optimal use of the OQUA, and incentivisation with feedback on the valuable outcomes of the OQUA for the patient, professional and healthcare. Future research is needed to determine the feasibility of the implementation strategy.

Background: Vestibular schwannomas (VSs) are benign tumors of the vestibulocochlear nerve that often cause significant neurological and functional impairment. Patient-reported outcomes, including quality of life (QoL), are essential for understanding the overall impact of VS and its treatment. This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the Vestibular Schwannoma Quality of Life (VSQOL) Index into German to expand its relevance to German-speaking populations.

Methods: We used a qualitative approach including translation and cognitive interviews with 10 patients who underwent VS surgery. The translation process followed the TRAPD protocol to ensure linguistic and conceptual accuracy. Cognitive interviews assessed the comprehensibility and relevance of the translated questionnaire.

Results: The translation showed remarkable consistency between translators, with minor discrepancies resolved by consensus. Cognitive interviews provided valuable insights that led to refinements in item wording. Participants emphasized the importance of an additional item on physician referrals, reflecting differences in health care systems between the United States and Germany.

Conclusions: The German VSQOL provides a comprehensive tool for assessing QoL in patients with VS that integrates patient-centered dimensions. A Validation study is underway to establish its reliability and validity.

Background: In recent decades, there has been a growing emphasis on involving patients in healthcare decision-making, driven by political, ethical, and research considerations. Although patient involvement is associated with improved health outcomes, understanding patient preferences regarding their role in decision-making is crucial for effective interventions. The Control Preferences Scale (CPS) measures patient preferences along a continuum from passive to active participation. However, its application in Denmark necessitates translation and cultural adaptation.

Methodology: This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the CPS for Danish use across diverse healthcare settings: acute care, cancer care, elective surgery, chronic medical treatment, and parental involvement in pediatric care. Following a cross-sectional design, the translation process was systematically planned and executed using Beaton's guidelines, including the five stages: forward and back translation, synthesis, expert review, and pre-testing.

Results: The translation and adaption process was carried out successfully. Few linguistic challenges were identified and resolved by the expert review. The findings of the pre-testing indicated high acceptability and usability of the adapted CPS among 152 Danish patients and parents. The collaborative role emerged as the most preferred across settings (69.8%), with passive roles more prevalent among cancer patients (30%) and parents waiting with their child to see a pediatrician (23.3%). Notable, more women preferred collaborative or active roles (83.9%) than men (73.9%). The content validity assessment yielded positive feedback, affirming the relevance and comprehensiveness of the CPS.

Conclusions: In summary, the adaptation and validation of the CPS for Danish use proved successful, providing a valuable tool for assessing patient's role preferences in healthcare decision-making. However, future studies are recommended to ensure construct validity and reliability through psychometric testing.

Background: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is a common cause of visual impairment and blindness in the elderly with globally increasing prevalence. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (anti-VEGF) treatment has improved visual prognosis of nAMD, but continuous treatment may cause anxiety and stress, although increase in visual acuity (VA) may also have positive effects on patients' quality of life. The health care burden due to frequent treatment and monitoring is apparent, but the effect of anti-VEGF treatment on patients' quality of life is not fully understood. We evaluated the overall impact of nAMD and its treatment on newly diagnosed patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in real-world setting.

Methods: The present prospective cohort study included newly diagnosed nAMD patients treated with anti-VEGF injections at Oulu University Hospital during 2019-2020. Data included parameters from comprehensive ophthalmic examination and fundus imaging, age at diagnosis, sex, comorbidities, visual acuity, and frequency of anti-VEGF injections. HRQoL was assessed by 15D questionnaire at diagnosis, 6 months, and 12 months.

Results: 95 nAMD patients were included. They were 78 ± 8 years old, 56 (59%) were female, and 74 (78%) had more than one comorbidity. The patients received 8 ± 3 anti-VEGF-injections. Visual acuity (VA) improved from 56 ± 18 to 61 ± 24 Early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) letters in 12 months. VA improved > 5 ETDRS letters in 45 (47%), remained stable in 30 (32%) and decreased > 5 letters in 17 (18%) eyes. The mean total 15D score reflecting overall HRQoL decreased from 0.850 ± 0.104 to 0.834 ± 0.103 in 12 months. Decreased HRQoL was associated with baseline best-corrected VA (BCVA) ≥ 70 ETDRS letters (p = 0.023) and more than one comorbidity (p = 0.034). HRQoL regarding visual function increased from 0.765 ± 0.194 to 0.789 ± 0.184 during the 12-month follow-up.

Conclusions: In real world setting, HRQoL regarding visual function improved in anti-VEGF-treated nAMD patients during the first 12 months after the diagnosis and treatment initiation. Good baseline VA or several comorbidities were associated with decreased overall HRQoL during the follow-up. Despite the effectiveness of anti-VEGF treatment on visual function, several other aspects affecting elderly patients' everyday life should be considered when nAMD treatment is implemented.

Purpose: To investigate whether the same health state results in the same distribution of responses on the EQ-5D youth and adult descriptive systems.

Methods: Adolescents aged 13-18 years with a range of health conditions and from the general school going population were recruited in South Africa (ZA) and Ethiopia (ET). In ZA participants completed the English EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-5L in parallel. Whereas in ET participants completed the Amharic EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in parallel. Analysis aimed to describe the transition between youth and adult instruments and not differences between countries.

Results: Data from 592 adolescents completing the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-5L (ZA) and 693 completing the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-Y-5L (ET) were analysed. Adolescents reported more problems on the youth versions compared to the adult version for the dimension of mental health. 13% and 4% of adolescents who reported no problems on the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L reported some problems on the EQ-5D-Y-3L respectively. This was less notable with transition between the five level versions with 4% of adolescents reporting more problems on the EQ-5D-Y-5L than the EQ-5D-5L. Very few adolescents reported severe problems (level 3 on the EQ-5D-3L or EQ-5D-Y-3L and level 4 and level 5 on the EQ-5D-5L or EQ-5D-5L) thus there was little variation between responses between the versions. In ZA, discriminatory power, measured on the Shannon's Index, was higher for Y-3L compared to 3L for pain/discomfort (ΔH'=0.11) and anxiety/depression (ΔH'=0.04) and across all dimensions for Y-3L compared to 5L. Similarly, in ET discriminatory power was higher for Y-5L than 5L (ΔH' range 0.05-0.09). Gwet's AC showed good to very good agreement across all paired (ZA) 3L and (ET) 5L dimensions. The summary score of all EQ-5D versions were able to differentiate between known disease groups.

Conclusion: Despite the overall high levels of agreement between EQ-5D instruments for youth and for adults, they do not provide identical results in terms of health state, from the same respondent. The differences were most notable for anxiety/depression. These differences in the way individuals respond to the various descriptive systems need to be taken into consideration for descriptive analysis, when transitioning between instruments, and when comparing preference-weighted scores.

Background: Fatigue is an important symptom for most patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The FACIT-Fatigue is a 13-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument that has been used in axSpA clinical trials to measure fatigue severity and impact on daily activities. However, the psychometric properties of the FACIT-Fatigue are not fully evaluated across the entire spectrum of axSpA including non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA) and radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA). This study determined: (1) the psychometric properties of the FACIT-Fatigue in nr-axSpA, r-axSpA, and the broad axSpA population and (2) FACIT-Fatigue scores representing meaningful within-patient change (MWPC), meaningful between-group differences, and cross-sectional severity bands.

Methods: Data from two Phase 3 trials in adults with nr-axSpA (BE MOBILE 1; N = 254) and r-axSpA (BE MOBILE 2; N = 332) were analyzed pooled and separately to assess the psychometric properties of the FACIT-Fatigue. MWPC and meaningful between-group difference estimates were derived using anchor-based and distribution-based methods. Cross-sectional fatigue severity bands were estimated using logistic regression analysis.

Results: The FACIT-Fatigue presented good internal consistency, adequate convergent and known-groups validity, and was sensitive to change over time across the full axSpA spectrum. A 5-11-point increase in FACIT-Fatigue score was estimated to represent a MWPC, with an 8-point increase selected as the responder definition. A 2.14-5.34-point difference in FACIT-Fatigue score change over a 16-week period was estimated to represent a small-to-medium meaningful between-group difference. FACIT-Fatigue score severity bands were defined as: none or minimal (>40), mild (>30 to ≤40), moderate (>21 to ≤30), and severe (≤21).

Conclusions: These findings support the use of the FACIT-Fatigue as a fit-for-purpose measure to assess fatigue-related treatment benefit in axSpA clinical trials. The proposed score estimates and thresholds can guide FACIT-Fatigue score interpretation across the full axSpA spectrum.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT03928704. Registered 26 April 2019-Retrospectively registered, https://classic.

Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT03928704 .

Clinicaltrials: Gov, NCT03928743. Registered 26 April 2019-Retrospectively registered, https://classic.

Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT03928743 .

Background: Social risk such as housing instability, trouble affording medical care and food insecurity are a downstream effect of social determinants of health (SDOHs) and are frequently associated with worse health. SDOHs include experiences of racism, sexism and other discrimination as well as differences in income and education. The collective effects of each social risk a person reports are called cumulative social risk. Cumulative social risk has traditionally been measured through counts or sum scores that treat each social risk as equivalent. We have proposed to use item response theory (IRT) as an alternative measure of person-reported cumulative social risk as IRT accounts for the severity in each risk and allows for more efficient screening with computerized adaptive testing.

Methods: We conducted a differential item functioning (DIF) analysis comparing IRT-based person-reported cumulative social risk scores by income and education in a population-based sample (n = 2122). Six social risk items were analyzed using the two-parameter logistic model and graded response model.

Results: Analyses showed no DIF on an IRT-based cumulative social risk score by education level for the six items examined. Statistically significant DIF was found on three items by income level but the ultimate effect on the scores was negligible.

Conclusions: Results suggest an IRT-based cumulative social risk score is not biased by education and income level and can be used for comparisons between groups. An IRT-based cumulative social risk score will be useful for combining datasets to examine policy factors affecting social risk and for more efficient screening of patients for social risk using computerized adaptive testing.

Background: The field of long COVID research is rapidly evolving, however, tools to assess and monitor symptoms and recovery of the disease are limited. The objective of the present study was to develop a new patient-reported outcomes instrument, the Symptoms Evolution of Long COVID‑19 (SE-LC19), and establish its content validity.

Methods: The 40-item SE-LC19 instrument was developed based on patient-relevant empirical evidence from scientific literature and clinical guidelines that reported symptoms specific to long COVID. A 2-part mixed-method approach was employed. Part 1: Qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of 41 patients with confirmed long COVID were conducted for the content validation of SE-LC19. During cognitive debriefing interviews, patients were asked to describe their understanding of the instrument's instructions, specific symptoms, response options, and recall period to ensure its relevance and comprehensiveness. Five clinicians of different medical specialties who regularly treated patients with long COVID were also interviewed to obtain their clinical expert opinions on SE-LC19. Part 2: Exploratory Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SE-LC19 data collected during the interviews.

Results: Overall, patients reported that the instructions, questions, recall period, and response options for SE-LC19 were comprehensive and relevant. Minor conceptual gaps reported by patients captured nuances in the experience of some symptoms that could be considered in future studies. Some patients suggested a revision of the recall period from 24 h to 7 days to be able to capture more symptoms given the waxing and waning nature of some symptoms. Clinicians found the instrument comprehensive with minimal suggestions regarding its content. Exploratory RMT analyses provided evidence that the SE-LC19 questionnaire performed as intended.

Conclusion: The present mixed-methods study in patients with confirmed long COVID supports the content validity and applicability of the SE-LC19 instrument to evaluate the symptoms of patients with long COVID. Further research is warranted to explore the psychometric properties of the instrument and refine a meaningful and robust patient-relevant endpoint for use in different settings such as clinical trials and clinical practice to track the onset, severity, and recovery of long COVID.