{"title":"探索传统药物、天然保健品和常规药物的使用:新西兰“所有药物”问卷的编制和测试。","authors":"E Lyn Lee, Jeff Harrison, Joanne Barnes","doi":"10.1007/s40801-023-00389-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) are popular healthcare choices among consumers globally. The latest national data on the use of TCAM practitioners in New Zealand (NZ) were collected over a decade ago. Robust data on the use of natural health products (NHPs) and TCAM practices alongside conventional medicines are not yet available in NZ.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to develop and test a bespoke questionnaire (All-MedsNZ) that included comprehensive data collection elements exploring NHPs' and conventional medicines' use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a questionnaire design study involving expert panel feedback, and engagement with TCAM users, in the development process. This work comprised questionnaire development (stage 1) followed by a questionnaire-testing study (stage 2). The questionnaire was developed on the basis of literature review findings and the research team's expertise. The questionnaire content was then validated by an expert panel comprising practitioners in TCAM and conventional medicine. Then, a two-phase study was utilised to test the questionnaire. Phase 1 involved participants (NHP users) completing the web-based questionnaire and providing feedback by answering probing questions added throughout the questionnaire to evaluate users' comprehension of the questions and to identify issues with the questionnaire. In phase 2, selected participants were interviewed online to gain in-depth insights into issues identified in phase one. Based on these findings, the questionnaire was revised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The expert panel (n = 9) confirmed the questionnaire had high face and content validity; most original questions were retained. In the questionnaire-testing study, 95 and 27 participants completed the phase 1 and 2 studies, respectively. Most questions achieved a high response rate of ≥ 90%, and participants had no major issues understanding and answering the questionnaire. Problematic questions were those relating to providing product barcodes and photographs, and information on product costs. Most of the NHPs data entered by participants included the brand/generic name, manufacturer/company name, main ingredient(s) and dose form. Generally, these NHP-related data were of acceptable quality. However, information on the main ingredient(s) of products entered by participants was less satisfactory: approximately one-third of the 143 NHPs recorded in the study had the main ingredient(s) missing or incorrectly stated. Interviews with participants reiterated the issues identified in the phase 1 study. The low response rates for some of the questions were partly due to participants' unpreparedness (i.e. not having NHPs/medicines on hand) to complete the questionnaire. In addition, a lack of clarity for the term 'natural health practitioner' led to confusion among some participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, no major design-, method- or questionnaire-related issues were identified in this development and testing work. The questionnaire demonstrated adequate face and content validity and acceptability among participants. The data collected were reasonably complete and of sufficient quality for analysis. Future studies should pilot the revised All-MedsNZ questionnaire with a larger, nationally representative sample to ascertain its feasibility and utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":11282,"journal":{"name":"Drugs - Real World Outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10928020/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Use of Traditional Medicines, Natural Health Products and Conventional Medicines: Development and Testing of the New Zealand 'All-Medicines' Questionnaire.\",\"authors\":\"E Lyn Lee, Jeff Harrison, Joanne Barnes\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40801-023-00389-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) are popular healthcare choices among consumers globally. The latest national data on the use of TCAM practitioners in New Zealand (NZ) were collected over a decade ago. Robust data on the use of natural health products (NHPs) and TCAM practices alongside conventional medicines are not yet available in NZ.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to develop and test a bespoke questionnaire (All-MedsNZ) that included comprehensive data collection elements exploring NHPs' and conventional medicines' use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a questionnaire design study involving expert panel feedback, and engagement with TCAM users, in the development process. This work comprised questionnaire development (stage 1) followed by a questionnaire-testing study (stage 2). The questionnaire was developed on the basis of literature review findings and the research team's expertise. The questionnaire content was then validated by an expert panel comprising practitioners in TCAM and conventional medicine. Then, a two-phase study was utilised to test the questionnaire. Phase 1 involved participants (NHP users) completing the web-based questionnaire and providing feedback by answering probing questions added throughout the questionnaire to evaluate users' comprehension of the questions and to identify issues with the questionnaire. In phase 2, selected participants were interviewed online to gain in-depth insights into issues identified in phase one. Based on these findings, the questionnaire was revised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The expert panel (n = 9) confirmed the questionnaire had high face and content validity; most original questions were retained. In the questionnaire-testing study, 95 and 27 participants completed the phase 1 and 2 studies, respectively. Most questions achieved a high response rate of ≥ 90%, and participants had no major issues understanding and answering the questionnaire. Problematic questions were those relating to providing product barcodes and photographs, and information on product costs. Most of the NHPs data entered by participants included the brand/generic name, manufacturer/company name, main ingredient(s) and dose form. Generally, these NHP-related data were of acceptable quality. However, information on the main ingredient(s) of products entered by participants was less satisfactory: approximately one-third of the 143 NHPs recorded in the study had the main ingredient(s) missing or incorrectly stated. Interviews with participants reiterated the issues identified in the phase 1 study. The low response rates for some of the questions were partly due to participants' unpreparedness (i.e. not having NHPs/medicines on hand) to complete the questionnaire. In addition, a lack of clarity for the term 'natural health practitioner' led to confusion among some participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, no major design-, method- or questionnaire-related issues were identified in this development and testing work. The questionnaire demonstrated adequate face and content validity and acceptability among participants. The data collected were reasonably complete and of sufficient quality for analysis. Future studies should pilot the revised All-MedsNZ questionnaire with a larger, nationally representative sample to ascertain its feasibility and utility.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11282,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drugs - Real World Outcomes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10928020/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drugs - Real World Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-023-00389-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs - Real World Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-023-00389-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Exploring the Use of Traditional Medicines, Natural Health Products and Conventional Medicines: Development and Testing of the New Zealand 'All-Medicines' Questionnaire.
Introduction: Traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) are popular healthcare choices among consumers globally. The latest national data on the use of TCAM practitioners in New Zealand (NZ) were collected over a decade ago. Robust data on the use of natural health products (NHPs) and TCAM practices alongside conventional medicines are not yet available in NZ.
Objectives: This study aimed to develop and test a bespoke questionnaire (All-MedsNZ) that included comprehensive data collection elements exploring NHPs' and conventional medicines' use.
Methods: This was a questionnaire design study involving expert panel feedback, and engagement with TCAM users, in the development process. This work comprised questionnaire development (stage 1) followed by a questionnaire-testing study (stage 2). The questionnaire was developed on the basis of literature review findings and the research team's expertise. The questionnaire content was then validated by an expert panel comprising practitioners in TCAM and conventional medicine. Then, a two-phase study was utilised to test the questionnaire. Phase 1 involved participants (NHP users) completing the web-based questionnaire and providing feedback by answering probing questions added throughout the questionnaire to evaluate users' comprehension of the questions and to identify issues with the questionnaire. In phase 2, selected participants were interviewed online to gain in-depth insights into issues identified in phase one. Based on these findings, the questionnaire was revised.
Results: The expert panel (n = 9) confirmed the questionnaire had high face and content validity; most original questions were retained. In the questionnaire-testing study, 95 and 27 participants completed the phase 1 and 2 studies, respectively. Most questions achieved a high response rate of ≥ 90%, and participants had no major issues understanding and answering the questionnaire. Problematic questions were those relating to providing product barcodes and photographs, and information on product costs. Most of the NHPs data entered by participants included the brand/generic name, manufacturer/company name, main ingredient(s) and dose form. Generally, these NHP-related data were of acceptable quality. However, information on the main ingredient(s) of products entered by participants was less satisfactory: approximately one-third of the 143 NHPs recorded in the study had the main ingredient(s) missing or incorrectly stated. Interviews with participants reiterated the issues identified in the phase 1 study. The low response rates for some of the questions were partly due to participants' unpreparedness (i.e. not having NHPs/medicines on hand) to complete the questionnaire. In addition, a lack of clarity for the term 'natural health practitioner' led to confusion among some participants.
Conclusion: Overall, no major design-, method- or questionnaire-related issues were identified in this development and testing work. The questionnaire demonstrated adequate face and content validity and acceptability among participants. The data collected were reasonably complete and of sufficient quality for analysis. Future studies should pilot the revised All-MedsNZ questionnaire with a larger, nationally representative sample to ascertain its feasibility and utility.
期刊介绍:
Drugs - Real World Outcomes targets original research and definitive reviews regarding the use of real-world data to evaluate health outcomes and inform healthcare decision-making on drugs, devices and other interventions in clinical practice. The journal includes, but is not limited to, the following research areas: Using registries/databases/health records and other non-selected observational datasets to investigate: drug use and treatment outcomes prescription patterns drug safety signals adherence to treatment guidelines benefit : risk profiles comparative effectiveness economic analyses including cost-of-illness Data-driven research methodologies, including the capture, curation, search, sharing, analysis and interpretation of ‘big data’ Techniques and approaches to optimise real-world modelling.