Dataset Information

The headache under-response to treatment (HURT) questionnaire, an outcome measure to guide follow-up in primary care: development, psychometric evaluation and assessment of utility.

ABSTRACT: Headache disorders are both common and burdensome but, given the many people affected, provision of health care to all is challenging. Structured headache services based in primary care are the most efficient, equitable and cost-effective solution but place responsibility for managing most patients on health-care providers with limited training in headache care. The development of practical management aids for primary care is therefore a purpose of the Global Campaign against Headache. This manuscript presents an outcome measure, the Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire, describing its purpose, development, psychometric evaluation and assessment for clinical utility. The objective was a simple-to-use instrument that would both assess outcome and provide guidance to improving outcome, having utility across the range of headache disorders, across clinical settings and across countries and cultures.After literature review, an expert consensus group drawn from all six world regions formulated HURT through item development and item reduction using item-response theory. Using the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study's general-population respondent panel, two mailed surveys assessed the psychometric properties of HURT, comparing it with other instruments as external validators. Reliability was assessed in patients in two culturally-contrasting clinical settings: headache specialist centres in Europe (n = 159) and primary-care centres in Saudi Arabia (n = 40). Clinical utility was assessed in similar settings (Europe n = 201; Saudi Arabia n = 342).The final instrument, an 8-item self-administered questionnaire, addressed headache frequency, disability, medication use and effect, patients' perceptions of headache "control" and their understanding of their diagnoses. Psychometric evaluation revealed a two-factor model (headache frequency, disability and medication use; and medication efficacy and headache control), with scale properties apparently stable across disorders and correlating well and in the expected directions with external validators. The literature review found few instruments linking assessment to clinical advice or suggested actions: HURT appeared to fill this gap. In European specialist care, it showed utility as an outcome measure across headache disorders. In Saudi Arabian primary care, HURT (translated into Arabic) was reliable and responsive to clinical change.With demonstrated validity and clinical utility across disorders, cultures and settings, HURT is available for clinical and research purposes.

SUBMITTER: Steiner TJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5812954 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo support better headache management in primary care, the Global Campaign against Headache developed an 8-question outcome measure, the Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire. HURT was designed by an expert consensus group with patient-input. It assesses the need for and response to treatment, and provides guidance on actions to optimize therapy. It has proven content validity.We aim to evaluate the Arabic version of HURT for clinical utility in primary care in Saudi Arabia.MethodsHURT was translated according to the Global Campaign's translation protocol. We assessed test-retest reliability in consecutive patients of four primary-care centres, who completed HURT at two visits 4-6 weeks apart while receiving usual care. We then provided training in headache management to the GPs practising in these centres, which were randomized in pairs to control (standard care) or intervention (care guided by implementation of HURT). We assessed responsiveness of HURT to clinical change by comparing base-line responses to HURT questions 1-6 with those at follow up. We assessed clinical utility by comparing outcomes between control and intervention pairs after 3 months, using locally-developed 5-point verbal-rating scales: the patient-satisfaction scale (PSS) and doctor-satisfaction scale (DSS).ResultsFor test-retest reliability in 40 patients, intra-class correlation coefficients were 0.66-0.78 for questions 1-4 and 0.90-0.93 for questions 5-7 (all P ? 0.001). For the dichotomous response to question 8, Kappa coefficient=1 (P<0.0001). Internal consistency was good (Cronbach's alpha=0.74). In 342 patients, HURT signalled clinical improvement over 3 months through statistically significant changes in responses to questions 1-6. PSS scores were higher among those in whom HURT recorded improvement, and also higher among those with less severe headache at baseline. Patients treated with guidance from HURT (n=207) were more satisfied than controls (n=135), but this did not quite reach statistical significance (P=0.06).ConclusionThe Arabic HURT Questionnaire is reliable and responsive to clinical change in Arabic-speaking headache patients in primary care. HURT showed clinical utility in this first assessment, conducted in parallel with studies elsewhere in other languages, but this needs further study. Other Arabic instruments are not available as standards for comparison.

Project description:PurposeRecurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI) is a highly prevalent condition associated with significant poor quality of life outcomes. A patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of rUTI-associated psychosocial impact is urgently required to supplement clinical evaluation and validate the challenges experienced by patients. This study therefore developed and validated the Recurrent UTI Impact Questionnaire (RUTIIQ).MethodsA rigorous four-stage methodology was followed: (I) concept elicitation through a qualitative survey of the experiences of people with rUTI (N = 1983); (II) Delphi expert screening of the RUTIIQ with expert rUTI clinicians (N = 15); (III) one-to-one cognitive interviews with people experiencing rUTI (N = 28) to evaluate the comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the RUTIIQ, and (IV) full pilot testing of the RUTIIQ with people experiencing rUTI (N = 240) to perform final item reduction and psychometric analysis.ResultsExploratory factor analysis demonstrated a five-factor structure comprising: 'patient satisfaction', 'work and activity interference', 'social wellbeing', 'personal wellbeing', and 'sexual wellbeing', collectively accounting for 73.8% of the total variance in pilot scores. Results from expert clinicians and patients indicated strong item content validity (I-CVI > .75). The internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the RUTIIQ subscales were excellent (Cronbach's α = .81-.96, ICC = .66-.91), and construct validity was strong (Spearman's ρ > .69).ConclusionThe RUTIIQ is a 30-item questionnaire with excellent psychometric properties, assessing the patient-reported psychosocial impact of living with rUTI symptoms and pain. This new instrument delivers the unique opportunity to enhance patient-centred care through standardised observation and monitoring of rUTI patient outcomes.Trial registrationThis study was pre-registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05086900).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although the importance of care coordination (CC) is well-recognized, cancer patients often receive poorly coordinated care across varied care settings and different oncology providers. Efforts to improve cancer care are hampered by lack of adequate measures. In this two-part, mixed-method study, we describe the development, refinement, and validation of a new care coordination instrument (CCI) designed to assess cancer patients' perception of CC. METHODS:In Study 1, an initial CCI was developed incorporating questions based on literature review. The items were then modified following four field tests conducted in a large academic hospital with oncology nurses (n?=?20) and cancer patients (n?=?120). This modified instrument was used to determine whether the CCI was able to distinguish CC between two practices (30 GI and 30 myeloma patients) within the same hospital setting. In Study 2, 68 patients receiving community-based care participated in seven focus groups. Based on these discussions, the CCI items were again refined, and psychometric evaluation was conducted to assess the quality of the instrument. RESULTS:Based on field tests, 3 domains of the CCI, Communication, Navigation, and Operational, were defined as critical components of CC. The Operational domain evaluates efficiency of care and is unique to this CCI. The field test demonstrated that GI patients reported significantly better CC Overall and for the Communication and Navigation domains (all p?<?.05). In Study 2, patients expressed concordance with the CCI items and their CC experiences, establishing validity of the CCI. Qualitative analysis of the focus group discussions indicated that the items with the highest frequencies of participants' comments were related to the concepts of Navigator, Team, Survey, and Communication. Quantitative analysis identified items with a limited response range or high rates of "neutral" responses; accordingly, those items were removed. The final CCI survey is a 29 item, multiple-choice questionnaire with excellent reliability, Cronbach's ??=?.922. CONCLUSIONS:We developed a novel, patient-centered tool with excellent psychometric properties that can be utilized across varied practice settings to assess patients' perception of cancer care coordination. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Not required; retrospectively registered ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03594006 20 July 2018.

Project description:BackgroundPsychometrically sound measures of chronic disease self-management tasks are needed to improve identification of patient needs and to tailor self-management programs. This study aimed to develop and conduct a preliminary psychometric analysis of the CanSMART questionnaire among a diverse, multimorbid Canadian population.MethodsThe data were drawn from a cross-sectional online survey to examine self-management needs and support preferences. Participants were 306 Canadian adults with one or more physical and/or emotional chronic conditions. The questionnaire on frequency of self-management tasks was developed with substantial patient partner input. We conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) of the 11 self-management tasks comprising the scale in two randomly selected subsamples, followed by Rasch analysis. Associations between patient characteristics and the self-management task subscales and individual items were explored.ResultsThe factor analyses identified two self-management task subscales that were labelled Coping tasks (6 items) and Physical tasks (3 items), with Cronbach's alpha of 0.70 and 0.67, respectively. Rasch analysis suggested that participants had difficulty discriminating between response options "mostly" and "always". In analyses of independent associations with patient characteristics, both Coping and Physical tasks were associated with reporting more than one chronic disease and employment disability. The Coping tasks subscale was associated with female sex. Two items, on medication use and monitoring biological parameters, did not load on either scale. Both were associated with specific diagnoses.ConclusionsIn this preliminary analysis, two self-management tasks subscales exhibit good psychometric properties. Two items that did not load on either scale may represent additional dimensions of self-management. This work provides the basis for further scale development and use in research and clinical practice.

Dataset Information

The headache under-response to treatment (HURT) questionnaire, an outcome measure to guide follow-up in primary care: development, psychometric evaluation and assessment of utility.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets