ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Despite substantial advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in the last decades, non-adherence (NA) continues to be a major challenge in the real-life treatment. To meet this challenge, adherence-promoting interventions with a tailored approach towards patient-specific adherence barriers that are identified using a reliable and practicable questionnaire are needed. The aim of this investigation was to develop and validate a respective questionnaire (Adherence Barriers Questionnaire for HIV: ABQ-HIV), based on an earlier version of the ABQ. METHODS:The existing ABQ was discussed by an expert panel and revised according to the specifications of ART therapy for HIV patients. Initially, the ABQ-HIV consisted of 17 items formulated as statements (4-point-Likert-scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree"). A higher score indicates a higher influence of a certain barrier on patient's perceptions. The ABQ-HIV was applied in a cross-sectional survey of German HIV patients. Evaluation of the questionnaire included an assessment of internal consistency as well as factor analysis. Convergent validity was assessed by comparing the ABQ-HIV score with the degree of self-reported adherence measured by the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8©). RESULTS:Three hundred seventy patients were able to be included in all validation analyses. The included patients had a mean age of 51.2?years, and 15.7% were female. The mean HIV infection time was 11.7?years, and the mean duration of treatment since first starting ART was 8.7?years. Twenty-five patients - excluded from all further analyses - were not able/willing to answer all ABQ-HIV questions. The results of the reliability analysis showed a Cronbach's ? of 0.708 for the initial 17-items in the ABQ-HIV draft. Two items were eliminated from the initial questionnaire, resulting in a Cronbach's ? of 0.720 and a split-half reliability of 0.724 (Spearman-Brown coefficient). Based on the reduced 15-item scale, the factor analysis resulted in three different components of the questionnaire. Component 1, with seven items, represents the unintentional adherence barriers. The second component, which contains five items, can be labelled as a subscale describing barriers associated with disease/treatment knowledge. Finally, three items, which can be summarized as intentional adherence barriers, show maximum loading in the third component. The score of the reduced 15-item ABQ-HIV scale, as well as the scores of the three subscales, correlated significantly with the MMAS score. All correlation coefficients were negative, indicating that higher burdens of adherence barriers measured by ABQ-HIV or its subscales were associated with a lower MMAS score and thus, with a lower adherence level. The ROC analysis using the MMAS low adherence classification as its state variable provided a cut-off for the ABQ-HIV scale of >?28 (sensitivity: 61.5%, specificity: 83.3%). In our sample, 85 patients (23.0%) reached a score of >?28 and appeared to face a high non-adherence risk. CONCLUSIONS:The ABQ-HIV is a practical, reliable, and valid instrument for identifying patient-specific barriers to adherence in the HIV treatment. It is also useful in identifying HIV patient subgroups, according to adherence barriers specific to these patients.
