测量年轻拉丁裔性少数男性艾滋病毒感染者抗逆转录病毒治疗依从性的心理测量特性:生态瞬时评估和电子药丸分配器研究。

Diana M Sheehan, Tendai Gwanzura, Cynthia Ibarra, Daisy Ramirez-Ortiz, Dallas Swendeman, Dustin T Duncan, Miguel Muñoz-Laboy, Jessy G Devieux, Mary Jo Trepka
{"title":"测量年轻拉丁裔性少数男性艾滋病毒感染者抗逆转录病毒治疗依从性的心理测量特性:生态瞬时评估和电子药丸分配器研究。","authors":"Diana M Sheehan, Tendai Gwanzura, Cynthia Ibarra, Daisy Ramirez-Ortiz, Dallas Swendeman, Dustin T Duncan, Miguel Muñoz-Laboy, Jessy G Devieux, Mary Jo Trepka","doi":"10.2196/51424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Increasing HIV rates among young Latino sexual minority men (YLSMM) warrant innovative and rigorous studies to assess prevention and treatment strategies. Ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) and electronic pill dispensers (EPDs) have been used to measure antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence repeatedly in real time and in participants' natural environments, but their psychometric properties among YLSMM are unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study's objective was to assess the concurrent validity, acceptability, compliance, and behavioral reactivity of EMAs and EPDs among YLSMM with HIV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 56 YLSMM with HIV with suboptimal ART adherence, aged 18-34 years, was recruited into a 28-consecutive-day EMA study. Concurrent validity was analyzed by comparing median ART adherence rates and calculating Spearman correlations between ART adherence measured by EMA, EPD, and baseline retrospective validated 3-item and single-item measures. Acceptability was assessed in exit interviews asking participants to rate EMA and EPD burden. Compliance was assessed by computing the percent lost to follow-up, the percent of EMAs missed, and the percentage of days the EPD was not opened that had corresponding EMA data self-reporting adherence to ARTs. Behavioral reactivity was assessed by computing the median change in ART adherence during the study period, using generalized mixed models to assess whether the cumulative number of EMAs completed and days of EPD use predicted ART adherence over time, and by asking participants to rate perceived reactivity using a Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EMA ART adherence was significantly correlated with baseline validated 3-item (r=0.41, P=.003) and single-item (r=0.52, P<.001) measures, but correlations were only significant for participants that reported EMA was not burdensome. Correlations for EPD ART adherence were weaker but significant (r=0.36, P=.009; r=0.34, P=.01, respectively). Acceptability was high for EMAs (48/54, 89%) and EPDs (52/54, 96%) per self-report. Loss to follow-up was 4% (2/56), with the remaining participants completing 88.6% (1339/1512) of study-prompted EMAs. The percentage of missed EMA surveys increased from 5.8% (22/378) in week 1 of the study to 16.7% (63/378) in week 4. Of 260 days when EPDs were not opened, 68.8% (179) had a corresponding EMA survey self-reporting ART adherence. Reactivity inferred from the median change in ART adherence over time was 8.8% for EMAs and -0.8% for EPDs. Each completed EMA was associated with 1.03 odds (95% CI 1-1.07) of EMA ART adherence over time, and each day of EPD use with 0.97 odds (95% CI 0.96-0.99) of EPD ART adherence over time. Self-reported perceived behavioral reactivity was 39% for EMAs and 35% for EPDs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides evidence of concurrent validity with retrospective validated measures for EMA- and EPD-measured ART adherence among YLSMM, when participant burden is carefully considered, without significant behavioral reactivity. While acceptability and compliance of EMAs and EPDs were high overall, noncompliance increased over time, suggesting respondent fatigue.</p>","PeriodicalId":74345,"journal":{"name":"Online journal of public health informatics","volume":"16 ","pages":"e51424"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11612584/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric Properties of Measuring Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence Among Young Latino Sexual Minority Men With HIV: Ecological Momentary Assessment and Electronic Pill Dispenser Study.\",\"authors\":\"Diana M Sheehan, Tendai Gwanzura, Cynthia Ibarra, Daisy Ramirez-Ortiz, Dallas Swendeman, Dustin T Duncan, Miguel Muñoz-Laboy, Jessy G Devieux, Mary Jo Trepka\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/51424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Increasing HIV rates among young Latino sexual minority men (YLSMM) warrant innovative and rigorous studies to assess prevention and treatment strategies. Ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) and electronic pill dispensers (EPDs) have been used to measure antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence repeatedly in real time and in participants' natural environments, but their psychometric properties among YLSMM are unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study's objective was to assess the concurrent validity, acceptability, compliance, and behavioral reactivity of EMAs and EPDs among YLSMM with HIV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 56 YLSMM with HIV with suboptimal ART adherence, aged 18-34 years, was recruited into a 28-consecutive-day EMA study. Concurrent validity was analyzed by comparing median ART adherence rates and calculating Spearman correlations between ART adherence measured by EMA, EPD, and baseline retrospective validated 3-item and single-item measures. Acceptability was assessed in exit interviews asking participants to rate EMA and EPD burden. Compliance was assessed by computing the percent lost to follow-up, the percent of EMAs missed, and the percentage of days the EPD was not opened that had corresponding EMA data self-reporting adherence to ARTs. Behavioral reactivity was assessed by computing the median change in ART adherence during the study period, using generalized mixed models to assess whether the cumulative number of EMAs completed and days of EPD use predicted ART adherence over time, and by asking participants to rate perceived reactivity using a Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EMA ART adherence was significantly correlated with baseline validated 3-item (r=0.41, P=.003) and single-item (r=0.52, P<.001) measures, but correlations were only significant for participants that reported EMA was not burdensome. Correlations for EPD ART adherence were weaker but significant (r=0.36, P=.009; r=0.34, P=.01, respectively). Acceptability was high for EMAs (48/54, 89%) and EPDs (52/54, 96%) per self-report. Loss to follow-up was 4% (2/56), with the remaining participants completing 88.6% (1339/1512) of study-prompted EMAs. The percentage of missed EMA surveys increased from 5.8% (22/378) in week 1 of the study to 16.7% (63/378) in week 4. Of 260 days when EPDs were not opened, 68.8% (179) had a corresponding EMA survey self-reporting ART adherence. Reactivity inferred from the median change in ART adherence over time was 8.8% for EMAs and -0.8% for EPDs. Each completed EMA was associated with 1.03 odds (95% CI 1-1.07) of EMA ART adherence over time, and each day of EPD use with 0.97 odds (95% CI 0.96-0.99) of EPD ART adherence over time. Self-reported perceived behavioral reactivity was 39% for EMAs and 35% for EPDs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides evidence of concurrent validity with retrospective validated measures for EMA- and EPD-measured ART adherence among YLSMM, when participant burden is carefully considered, without significant behavioral reactivity. While acceptability and compliance of EMAs and EPDs were high overall, noncompliance increased over time, suggesting respondent fatigue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74345,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Online journal of public health informatics\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"e51424\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11612584/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Online journal of public health informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/51424\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Online journal of public health informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/51424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:拉丁裔年轻性少数男性(YLSMM)中艾滋病毒感染率的上升需要创新和严格的研究来评估预防和治疗策略。生态瞬时评估(EMAs)和电子药丸分发器(EPDs)已被用于实时和在参与者的自然环境中反复测量抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)的依从性,但它们在YLSMM中的心理测量特性尚不清楚。目的:本研究的目的是评估EMAs和EPDs在HIV感染的YLSMM中的并发效度、可接受性、依从性和行为反应性。方法:将56名年龄在18-34岁的艾滋病毒感染者纳入一项连续28天的EMA研究。通过比较中位抗逆转录病毒治疗依从率和计算由EMA、EPD测量的抗逆转录病毒治疗依从性与基线回顾性验证的3项和单项测量之间的Spearman相关性来分析并发效度。可接受性在离职面谈中进行评估,要求参与者对EMA和EPD负担进行评分。通过计算随访损失的百分比、错过的EMA百分比和未打开EPD的天数百分比来评估依从性,EPD具有相应的EMA数据自我报告对ARTs的依从性。通过计算研究期间ART依从性的中位数变化来评估行为反应性,使用广义混合模型来评估完成EMAs的累积数量和使用EPD的天数是否预测ART依从性,并要求参与者使用李克特量表对感知反应性进行评分。结果:EMA抗逆转录病毒治疗依从性与基线验证的3项(r=0.41, P= 0.003)和单项(r=0.52)显著相关。结论:当仔细考虑参与者负担时,本研究为YLSMM中EMA和epd测量的抗逆转录病毒治疗依从性的回顾性验证措施提供了并发效度的证据,没有显著的行为反应性。虽然环境管理条例和环境保护条例的可接受性和依从性总体上很高,但不依从性随着时间的推移而增加,表明受访者疲劳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Psychometric Properties of Measuring Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence Among Young Latino Sexual Minority Men With HIV: Ecological Momentary Assessment and Electronic Pill Dispenser Study.

Background: Increasing HIV rates among young Latino sexual minority men (YLSMM) warrant innovative and rigorous studies to assess prevention and treatment strategies. Ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) and electronic pill dispensers (EPDs) have been used to measure antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence repeatedly in real time and in participants' natural environments, but their psychometric properties among YLSMM are unknown.

Objective: The study's objective was to assess the concurrent validity, acceptability, compliance, and behavioral reactivity of EMAs and EPDs among YLSMM with HIV.

Methods: A convenience sample of 56 YLSMM with HIV with suboptimal ART adherence, aged 18-34 years, was recruited into a 28-consecutive-day EMA study. Concurrent validity was analyzed by comparing median ART adherence rates and calculating Spearman correlations between ART adherence measured by EMA, EPD, and baseline retrospective validated 3-item and single-item measures. Acceptability was assessed in exit interviews asking participants to rate EMA and EPD burden. Compliance was assessed by computing the percent lost to follow-up, the percent of EMAs missed, and the percentage of days the EPD was not opened that had corresponding EMA data self-reporting adherence to ARTs. Behavioral reactivity was assessed by computing the median change in ART adherence during the study period, using generalized mixed models to assess whether the cumulative number of EMAs completed and days of EPD use predicted ART adherence over time, and by asking participants to rate perceived reactivity using a Likert scale.

Results: EMA ART adherence was significantly correlated with baseline validated 3-item (r=0.41, P=.003) and single-item (r=0.52, P<.001) measures, but correlations were only significant for participants that reported EMA was not burdensome. Correlations for EPD ART adherence were weaker but significant (r=0.36, P=.009; r=0.34, P=.01, respectively). Acceptability was high for EMAs (48/54, 89%) and EPDs (52/54, 96%) per self-report. Loss to follow-up was 4% (2/56), with the remaining participants completing 88.6% (1339/1512) of study-prompted EMAs. The percentage of missed EMA surveys increased from 5.8% (22/378) in week 1 of the study to 16.7% (63/378) in week 4. Of 260 days when EPDs were not opened, 68.8% (179) had a corresponding EMA survey self-reporting ART adherence. Reactivity inferred from the median change in ART adherence over time was 8.8% for EMAs and -0.8% for EPDs. Each completed EMA was associated with 1.03 odds (95% CI 1-1.07) of EMA ART adherence over time, and each day of EPD use with 0.97 odds (95% CI 0.96-0.99) of EPD ART adherence over time. Self-reported perceived behavioral reactivity was 39% for EMAs and 35% for EPDs.

Conclusions: This study provides evidence of concurrent validity with retrospective validated measures for EMA- and EPD-measured ART adherence among YLSMM, when participant burden is carefully considered, without significant behavioral reactivity. While acceptability and compliance of EMAs and EPDs were high overall, noncompliance increased over time, suggesting respondent fatigue.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Reporting of Fairness Metrics in Clinical Risk Prediction Models: A Call for Change to Ensure Equitable Precision Health Benefits for All. Expansion and Assessment of a Web-Based 24-Hour Dietary Recall Tool, Foodbook24, for Use Among Diverse Populations Living in Ireland: Comparative Analysis. Quantifying Patient Demand for Orthopedics Care by Region Through Google Trends Analysis: Descriptive Epidemiology Study. E-Screening for Prenatal Depression in Kampala, Uganda Using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale: Survey Results. Nowcasting to Monitor Real-Time Mpox Trends During the 2022 Outbreak in New York City: Evaluation Using Reportable Disease Data Stratified by Race or Ethnicity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1