Development and description of measurement properties of an instrument to assess treatment burden among patients with multiple chronic conditions

BMC Medicine

Philippe Ravaud³  Bruno Falissard¹  Dan Baruch⁴  David T Eton²  Victor M Montori²  Viet-Thi Tran⁵ 

[1] Université Paris Sud, Paris, France;Division of Health Care and Policy Research, Department of Health Sciences Research and Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA;Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA;Université Paris Denis-Diderot, Faculté de Médecine, Paris, France;INSERM U738, Paris, France

关键词: workload;    questionnaires;    quality of life;    physician-patient relations;    patient participation;    chronic disease/therapy;   

Others  :  1126065
DOI  :  10.1186/1741-7015-10-68

 received in 2012-01-13, accepted in 2012-07-04,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Patients experience an increasing treatment burden related to everything they do to take care of their health: visits to the doctor, medical tests, treatment management and lifestyle changes. This treatment burden could affect treatment adherence, quality of life and outcomes. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument for measuring treatment burden for patients with multiple chronic conditions.

Methods

Items were derived from a literature review and qualitative semistructured interviews with patients. The instrument was then validated in a sample of patients with chronic conditions recruited in hospitals and general practitioner clinics in France. Factor analysis was used to examine the questionnaire structure. Construct validity was studied by the relationships between the instrument's global score, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) scores and the complexity of treatment as assessed by patients and physicians. Agreement between patients and physicians was appraised. Reliability was determined by a test-retest method.

Results

A sample of 502 patients completed the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ), which consisted of 7 items (2 of which had 4 subitems) defined after 22 interviews with patients. The questionnaire showed a unidimensional structure. The Cronbach's α was 0.89. The instrument's global score was negatively correlated with TSQM scores (r_s = -0.41 to -0.53) and positively correlated with the complexity of treatment (r_s = 0.16 to 0.40). Agreement between patients and physicians (n = 396) was weak (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.47)). Reliability of the retest (n = 211 patients) was 0.76 (0.67 to 0.83).

Conclusions

This study provides the first valid and reliable instrument assessing the treatment burden for patients across any disease or treatment context. This instrument could help in the development of treatment strategies that are both efficient and acceptable for patients.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Tran et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Alwan A: Global Status Report on Noncommunicable Diseases 2010. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2011.
• [2]Wolff JL, Starfield B, Anderson G: Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly. Arch Intern Med 2002, 162:2269-2276.
• [3]Tinetti ME, Fried T: The end of the disease era. Am J Med 2004, 116:179-185.
• [4]Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW: Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA 2005, 294:716-724.
• [5]Russell LB, Suh DC, Safford MA: Time requirements for diabetes self-management: too much for many? J Fam Pract 2005, 54:52-56.
• [6]Huang ES, Brown SE, Ewigman BG, Foley EC, Meltzer DO: Patient perceptions of quality of life with diabetes-related complications and treatments. Diabetes Care 2007, 30:2478-2483.
• [7]Eton DT, Mullan RJ, Yost KJ, Egginton J, Ridgeway J, Fields HE, Mustafa M, Schmit K, Erwin PJ, Murad H, Montori VM: A systematic review of burden of treatment instruments in three chronic diseases. Int Soc Qual Life Res 2011., 86(Suppl) ab. 294
• [8]Eton DT, Oliveira DR, Egginton J, Mair FS, May C, Montori VM: Understanding the burden of treatment in patients with multiple chronic conditions: Evidence from exploratory interviews. Qual Life Res 2010., 19(Suppl 1) ab. 1673
• [9]Vijan S, Hayward RA, Ronis DL, Hofer TP: Brief report: the burden of diabetes therapy: implications for the design of effective patient-centered treatment regimens. J Gen Intern Med 2005, 20:479-482.
• [10]Vermeire E, Hearnshaw H, Van Royen P, Denekens J: Patient adherence to treatment: three decades of research. A comprehensive review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2001, 26:331-342.
• [11]Ho PM, Rumsfeld JS, Masoudi FA, McClure DL, Plomondon ME, Steiner JF, Magid DJ: Effect of medication nonadherence on hospitalization and mortality among patients with diabetes mellitus. Arch Intern Med 2006, 166:1836-1841.
• [12]Rasmussen JN, Chong A, Alter DA: Relationship between adherence to evidence-based pharmacotherapy and long-term mortality after acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 2007, 297:177-186.
• [13]May C, Montori VM, Mair FS: We need minimally disruptive medicine. BMJ 2009, 339:b2803.
• [14]Wilcox AR, Dragnev MC, Darcey CJ, Siegel CA: A new tool to measure the burden of Crohn's disease and its treatment: do patient and physician perceptions match? Inflamm Bowel Dis 2010, 16:645-650.
• [15]Liu JY, Woloshin S, Laycock WS, Rothstein RI, Finlayson SR, Schwartz LM: Symptoms and treatment burden of gastroesophageal reflux disease: validating the GERD assessment scales. Arch Intern Med 2004, 164:2058-2064.
• [16]Brod M, Hammer M, Kragh N, Lessard S, Bushnell DM: Development and validation of the Treatment Related Impact Measure of Weight (TRIM-Weight). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010, 8:19. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Brod M, Hammer M, Christensen T, Lessard S, Bushnell DM: Understanding and assessing the impact of treatment in diabetes: the Treatment-Related Impact Measures for Diabetes and Devices (TRIM-Diabetes and TRIM-Diabetes Device). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009, 7:83. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Prins MH, Guillemin I, Gilet H, Gabriel S, Essers B, Raskob G, Kahn SR: Scoring and psychometric validation of the Perception of Anticoagulant Treatment Questionnaire (PACT-Q). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009, 7:30. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Falissard B: Mesurer la subjectivité en santé. Perspective méthodologique et statistique. Paris, France: Masson; 2001.
• [20]Guyatt GH, Bombardier C, Tugwell PX: Measuring disease-specific quality of life in clinical trials. CMAJ 1986, 134:889-895.
• [21]Terwee CB, Bot SD, De Boer MR, Van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, De Vet HC: Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007, 60:34-42.
• [22]Frisbie D, Brandenburg D: Equivalence of questionnaire items with varying response formats. J Educ Meas 1979, 16:43-48.
• [23]Wildt A, Mazis A: Determinant of scale response: label versus position. J Marketing Res 1978, 15:261-267.
• [24]Schwarz N, Knauper B, Hippler H, Noelle-Neumann E, Clark L: Rating scales: Numeric values may change the meaning of scale labels. Public Opin Quart 1991, 55:570-582.
• [25]Cronbach L: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951, 16:297-334.
• [26]Nunnaly J, Bernstein I: Psychometric Theory. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
• [27]Streiner D, Norman G: Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2008.
• [28]Atkinson MJ, Sinha A, Hass SL, Colman SS, Kumar RN, Brod M, Rowland CR: Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2004, 2:12. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Atkinson MJ, Kumar R, Cappelleri JC, Hass SL: Hierarchical construct validity of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM version II) among outpatient pharmacy consumers. Value Health 2005, 8(Suppl 1):S9-S24.
• [30]Juniper E, Guyatt G, Jaeschke R: How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. New York, USA: Raven Press; 1996:49-56.
• [31]Greene W: Econometric Analysis. New York, USA: Macmillan; 2000.
• [32]Joe H, Ward J: Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc 1963, 58:236-244.
• [33]Shrout PE, Fleiss JL: Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979, 86:420-428.
• [34]Lohr KN: Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:193-205.
• [35]Bland JM, Altman DG: Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999, 8:135-160.
• [36]Bohlen K, Scoville E, Shippee ND, May CR, Montori VM: Overwhelmed patients: a videographic analysis of how patients with type 2 diabetes and clinicians articulate and address treatment burden during clinical encounters. Diabetes Care 2012, 35:47-49.
• [37]Gallacher K, May CR, Montori VM, Mair FS: Understanding patients' experiences of treatment burden in chronic heart failure using normalization process theory. Ann Fam Med 2011, 9:235-243.