Dataset Information

Health-related Quality of Life Instrument With 8 Items for Use in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Validation Study in Korea.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Health-related Quality of Life Instrument with 8 Items (HINT-8) in patients with diabetes. HINT-8 is a newly-developed, generic health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument.

Methods

Three HRQoL instruments-HINT-8, EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), and Short Form Health Survey version 2.0 (SF-36v2)-were provided to 300 patients with diabetes visiting a tertiary hospital for follow-up visits in Korea. The HRQoL scores obtained using the HINT-8 were evaluated for subgroups with known differences based on demographics and diabetes-related characteristics (known-group validity). The mean scores of the instruments were compared between groups segmented by their responses to the HINT-8 (discriminatory ability). Correlation coefficients of the HINT-8 with other instruments were calculated (convergent and divergent validity). The Cohen kappa and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were also evaluated (test-retest reliability).

Results

The average HINT-8 indexes were lower among women, older, and less-educated subjects. Subjects who did not list any problems on the HINT-8 had significantly higher HRQoL scores than those who did. The correlation coefficients of the HINT-8 with the EQ-5D-5L index and EuroQoL visual analogue scale were 0.715 (p<0.001) and 0.517 (p<0.001), respectively. The correlation coefficients between the HINT-8 index and the scores of 8 domains of the SF-36v2 ranged from 0.478 (p<0.001) to 0.669 (p<0.001). The Cohen kappa values for the HINT-8 ranged from 0.268 to 0.601, and the ICC of the HINT-8 index was 0.800 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.720 to 0.860).

Conclusions

This study showed that the HINT-8 is a valid and reliable HRQoL instrument for patients with diabetes.

SUBMITTER: Kim J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9201088 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures describe natural history, manage disease, and measure the effects of interventions in trials. Patients themselves increasingly use Web-based PRO tools to track their progress, share their data, and even self-experiment. However, existing PROs have limitations such as being: designed for paper (not screens), long and burdensome, negatively framed, under onerous licensing restrictions, either too generic or too specific. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to develop and validate the core items of a modular, patient-centric, PRO system (Thrive) that could measure health status across a range of chronic conditions with minimal burden. METHODS:Thrive was developed in 4 phases, largely consistent with Food and Drug Administration guidance regarding PRO development. First, preliminary core items (common across multiple conditions: core Thrive items) were developed through literature review, analysis of approximately 20 existing PROs on PatientsLikeMe, and feedback from psychometric and content experts. Second, 2 rounds of cognitive interviews were iteratively conducted with patients (N=14) to obtain feedback on the preliminary items. Third, core Thrive items were administered electronically along with comparator measures, including 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF)-20 and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9, to a large sample (N=2002) of adults with chronic diseases through the PatientsLikeMe platform. On the basis of theoretical and empirical rationale, items were revised or removed. Fourth, the revised core Thrive items were administered to another sample of patients (N=704) with generic and condition-specific comparator measures. A psychometric evaluation, which included both modern and classical test theory approaches, was conducted on these items, and several more items were removed. RESULTS:Cognitive interviews helped to remove confusing or redundant items. Empirical testing of subscales revealed good internal consistency (Cronbach alpha=.712-.879), test-retest reliability (absolute intraclass correlations=.749-.912), and convergent validity with legacy PRO scales (eg, Pearson r=.5-.75 between Thrive subscales and PHQ-9 total). The finalized instrument consists of a 19-item core including 5 multi-item subscales: Core symptoms, Abilities, Mobility, Sleep, and Thriving. Results provide evidence of construct (content, convergent) validity, high levels of test-retest and internal consistency reliability, and the ability to detect change over time. The items did not exhibit bias based on gender or age, and the items generally functioned similarly across conditions. These results support the use of Thrive Core items across diverse chronic patient populations. CONCLUSIONS:Thrive appears to be a useful approach for capturing important domains for patients with chronic conditions. This core set serves as a foundation to begin developing modular condition-specific versions in the near future. Cross-walking against traditional PROs from the PatientsLikeMe platform is underway, in addition to clinical validation and comparison with biomarkers. Thrive is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 4.0.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation can reduce quality of life, and different models of anticoagulation management might have different impacts on satisfaction with this component of medical care. Yet, to our knowledge, there are no scales measuring quality of life and satisfaction with anticoagulation that can be generalized across different models of anticoagulation management. We describe the development and preliminary validation of such an instrument - the Duke Anticoagulation Satisfaction Scale (DASS). METHODS: The DASS is a 25-item scale addressing the (a) negative impacts of anticoagulation (limitations, hassles and burdens); and (b) positive impacts of anticoagulation (confidence, reassurance, satisfaction). Each item has 7 possible responses. The DASS was administered to 262 patients currently receiving oral anticoagulation. Scales measuring generic quality of life, satisfaction with medical care, and tendency to provide socially desirable responses were also administered. Statistical analysis included assessment of item variability, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), scale structure (factor analysis), and correlations between the DASS and demographic variables, clinical characteristics, and scores on the above scales. A follow-up study of 105 additional patients assessed test-retest reliability. RESULTS: 220 subjects answered all items. Ceiling and floor effects were modest, and 25 of the 27 proposed items grouped into 2 factors (positive impacts, negative impacts, this latter factor being potentially subdivided into limitations versus hassles and burdens). Each factor had a high degree of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.78-0.91). The limitations and hassles factors consistently correlated with the SF-36 scales measuring generic quality of life, while the positive psychological impact scale correlated with age and time on anticoagulation. The intra-class correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.80. CONCLUSIONS: The DASS has demonstrated reasonable psychometric properties to date. Further validation is ongoing. To the degree that dissatisfaction with anticoagulation leads to decreased adherence, poorer INR control, and poor clinical outcomes, the DASS has the potential to help identify reasons for dissatisfaction (and positive satisfaction), and thus help to develop interventions to break this cycle. As an instrument designed to be applicable across multiple models of anticoagulation management, the DASS could be crucial in the scientific comparison between those models of care.

Project description:IntroductionAmblyopia is a neurodevelopmental vision disorder, characterized by poor vision in one or both eyes. Given the lack of existing clinical outcome assessments (COA) considered fit-for-purpose for amblyopia clinical trials, this study developed new COAs to assess amblyopia symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) impacts in adult and pediatric amblyopia populations that conform with best practice standards and regulatory guidelines.MethodsFindings from a targeted qualitative literature review informed the development of three versions of the new Amblyopia Quality of Life Questionnaire (AmbQoL): a patient-reported outcome measure (PRO) for individuals aged 13 years and older, a PRO for children aged 9-12 years, and an observer-reported outcome measure (ObsRO) for caregivers of children aged 4-8 years. Qualitative interviews were conducted with the target populations, and with ophthalmologists experienced in treating amblyopia patients to evaluate the content validity for further development of the AmbQoL. A translatability assessment was conducted to ensure cultural appropriateness and usability across multiple languages. Feedback from Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was also sought on the instruments, and clinical experts provided input at key stages.ResultsInterviews were conducted with 112 patients/caregivers and ten ophthalmologists from the USA, France, and Germany. The instructions, items, and response options were well understood across all AmbQoL versions. Feedback from the patients, caregivers, ophthalmologists, the translatability assessment, the FDA, and the expert clinicians informed minor wording modifications to enhance clarity and translatability. Some items were removed due to low relevance. The study resulted in a 23-item adult/adolescent PRO, 24-item child PRO, and 12-item ObsRO, each employing a 7-day recall period.ConclusionEach AmbQoL version has documented support for its face and content validity for use in amblyopia populations aged ≥ 4 years. Further research is necessary to evaluate the psychometric measurement properties of the AmbQoL instruments to enable their use in amblyopia treatment trials.

Project description:BackgroundThis paper describes the development of the Chinese Quality of Life Instrument (ChQOL) which is a self-report health status instrument. Chinese Medicine relies very much on asking subjective feelings of patients in the process of diagnosis and monitoring of treatment. For thousands of years, Chinese Medicine practitioners have accumulated a good wealth of experiences in asking questions about health of their patients based on the concept of health in Chinese Medicine. These experiences were then transformed into questions for the ChQOL. It is believed that ChQOL can contribute to the existing Patient Report Outcome measures. This paper outlines the concept of health and disease in Traditional Chinese Medicine, the building of the conceptual framework of the ChQOL, the steps of drafting, selecting and validating the items, and the psychometric properties of the ChQOL.MethodsThe development of the ChQOL was based on the concept of health in Traditional Chinese Medicine with a theory driven approach. Based on the results of literature review, the research team developed an initial model of health which encompassed the concept of health in TCM. An expert panel was then invited to comment and give suggestions for improvement of the initial model. According to their suggestions, the model was refined and a set of initial items for the ChQOL was drafted. The refined model, together with the key domains, facets and initial items of the ChQOL were then mailed to a sample of about 100 Chinese medicine practitioners throughout Mainland China for their comments and advice. A revised set of items were developed for linguistic testing by a convenience sample consisting of both healthy people and people who attended Chinese Medicine treatment. After that, an item pool was developed for field-testing. Field test was conducted on a convenience sample of healthy and patient subjects to determine the construct validity and psychometric properties of the ChQOL.ResultsConstruct validity was established by various methods, i.e. the internal consistency in all facets and domains were good; the correlation between facets to domain, and domains to overall ChQOL correlation were high; confirmatory factor analysis showed that the structure fitness of all facets, domain and overall structure were good with CFI > 0.9. Test-retest reliability was also good, especially in the domain scores with ICC value ranging from 0.83 to 0.90. No ceiling or floor effect was noted which indicated that ChQOL can be applied to subjects with a wide range of health status. Most facet scores, domain scores and the overall CHQOL scores were able to discriminate groups of subjects with known differences in health status. The ChQOL had mild positive convergence with the other generic health related QOL measures, i.e. the WHOQOL-100 and the SF-36, with moderate correlations.ConclusionIn conclusion, the study indicated that the ChQOL is conceptually valid with satisfactory psychometric properties. It can provide additional information on health and QOL on top of the existing generic health related QOL measures. Furthermore, it forms basis for further testing and applications in clinical trials.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT12) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) designed to evaluate quality of life. We assessed the psychometric properties of the Greek version (iHOT12-Gr) in hip osteoarthritic patients. METHODS:Data from 124 patients aged >?50?years were used for factor analysis. Reliability evaluation included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and interpretability. Content validity was examined by calculating the item-level content validity indices (I-CVI) and the scale-level content validity indices (S-CVI), using two methods: S-CVI Average (S-CVI/Ave), and the S-CVI Universal Agreement among experts (S-CVI/UA). Construct validity was tested against Greek versions of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS-Greek), Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS-Gr), and the 30?s chair-to-stand, Timed Up & Go (TUG), and 9-stairs-ascend/descend (9S-A/D) tests. Known-groups validity was examined using LEFS-Greek (cut-off?=?53 points) as estimate variable. Responsiveness was examined pre and post total hip arthroplasty (4 and 8?weeks). RESULTS:Factor analysis revealed a two-factor model. Factor-1 (items 1-9) reflects "Symptoms and functionality", while Factor-2 (items 10-12) reflects "Hip disorder-related concerns". Reliability: Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of iHOT12-Gr-total were excellent: Cronbach's alpha >?0.92 and ICC(95% CI)?>?0.976(0.96-0.99)(p?<?0.001). Interpretability: There was no floor or ceiling effect; measurement error: 3.72 (Factor-1), 3.64 (Factor-2), and 3.22 (iHOT12-Gr-total); minimal detectable change: 10.3 (Factor-1), 10.1 (Factor-2), and 8.92 (iHOT12-Gr-total). VALIDITY:Content validity: The I-CVI value of the 12 items ranged from 1.00 to 0.83, the S-CVI/Ave was 0.97 and the S-CVI/UA was 0.83. Construct validity: iHOT12-Gr correlated strongly with both LEFS-Greek and MHHS-Gr, and weakly but significantly with 30s chair-to-stand, TUG and 9S-A/D (p?<?0.001). Known-groups validity showed that iHOT12-Gr well discriminated subgroups of patients (p?<?0.001). ROC analysis cut-off points were 51.9 (Factor-1), 25 (Factor-2) and 45.2 (iHOT12-Gr-total) (p?<?0.001). Responsiveness: Four and 8?weeks postoperatively, standardized response means of Factor-1, Factor-2, and iHOT12-Gr-total were?>?0.8. CONCLUSION:iHOT12-Gr showed excellent reliability properties. The content validity was excellent and significant weak-to-strong correlations were found regarding construct validity. The known-group validity was also significant, while the responsiveness was excellent. iHOT12-Gr could be a reliable and valid PRO for assessing quality of life in patients with hip osteoarthritis.