Development and psychometric properties of the parent version of the Profile of Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (PONS) in children and adolescents

BMC Pediatrics

Regina Sala³  Federico Fiori³  Gillian Baird¹  Paul Gringras²  Paramala Santosh³ 

[1] Paediatric Neurosciences, Evelina London Children’s Hospital, St Thomas Hospital, London, UK;Children’s Sleep Medicine Department, Paediatric Neurosciences, Evelina London Children’s Hospital, St Thomas Hospital, London, UK;Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF, UK

关键词: HealthTracker™;    Psychometric properties;    Internet-based scale;    Patient centred outcome measures;    Patient reported outcomes;    Profile Of Neuropsychiatric Symptoms scale;   

Others  :  1211745
DOI  :  10.1186/s12887-015-0376-x

 received in 2014-06-16, accepted in 2015-05-08,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The use of neuropsychiatric Patient Centred Outcome Measures (PCOMs) in routine child mental health and paediatric services is very time consuming and often requires multiple scales being completed as no single scale covers all areas of psychopathology. The use of a web-based programme can overcome these problems and contribute to improved use of PCOMs in clinical practice. We aim to develop a web-based scale (using HealthTracker™) to screen and identify young people with significant neuropsychiatric symptoms to enable early intervention.

Methods

Qualitative development of the Profile of Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (PONS) and quantitative evaluation of the psychometric properties of the PONS scale (parent version). Parents of 929 from the general population and 147 with neuropsychiatric disorders (5–18 years old) completed the PONS online. In addition, those children with neuropsychiatric disorders were assessed for the presence of current and lifetime psychiatric disorders using the Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA).

Results

The PONS scale (parent version) consists of 30 symptom domains rated on a 7-point scale for both frequency and impairment. We found an intra-class correlation coefficient for single measures was 0.44 (0.42-0.46 95 % CI, F = 22.84, p ≤ 0.0001) and for average measures was 0.96 (0.95-0.96 95 % CI, F = 22.84, p ≤ 0.0001). The factor analysis showed a 4-factor model: Neurodevelopmental Disability; Behavioural and Emotional Dysregulation; Psychoses and Personality Dysfunction; and Anxiety and Depression. The receiver operating characteristic area for the 4-factors was 0.96 (SE = 0.006; 0.95-0.97 95 % CI).

Conclusions

The PONS scale (parent version) is a web-based PCOM on the HealthTracker™ system that is a rapid, engaging measure that has excellent reliability and validity. The system allows for automated scoring and immediate feedback of statistical cut-off points and assists clinicians with diagnostic decision-making and optimises use of clinician time.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Santosh et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Costello EJ, Egger H, Angold A. 10-year research update review: the epidemiology of child and adolescent psychiatric disorders: I. Methods and public health burden. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2005; 44(10):972-86.
• [2]Waddell C, Offord DR, Shepherd CA, Hua JM, McEwan K. Child psychiatric epidemiology and Canadian public policy-making: the state of the science and the art of the possible. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 2002; 47(9):825-32.
• [3]Maulik P, Mascarenhas M, Mathers C, Dua T, Saxena S. Prevalence of intellectual disability: a meta-analysis of population-based studies. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2011; 32(2):419-436.
• [4]Leaf PJ, Alegria M, Cohen P, Goodman SH, Horwitz SM, Hoven CW et al.. Mental health service use in the community and schools: results from the four-community MECA Study. Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders Study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 1996; 35(7):889-97.
• [5]Meltzer H, Gatward R, Goodman R, Ford T. Mental Health of Children and Adolescents in Great Britain. Stationery Office, London; 2000.
• [6]Achenbach T, Rescorla L. The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL): Manual for the ASEBA Preschool forms and Profiles. University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, Burlington, VT; 2000.
• [7]Goodman R. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 1997; 38(5):581-6.
• [8]NIH. 2008; Available from: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/research-priorities/rdoc/index.shtml.
• [9]Browne J, Jamieson L, Lewsey J, van der Meulen J, Black N, Cairns J, et al. Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Elective Surgery, 2007: London.
• [10]Guidance of the Routine Collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Department of Health, London; 2007.
• [11]Guidance on the Routine Collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). For the NHS in England 2009/10. Vol. 2014. Department of Health, London; 2008.
• [12]Devlin N, and Sppleby J. Getting the most out of PROMS. Putting health outcomes t the heart of NHS decision-making. 2010: The King’s Fund. Office of Health Economics.
• [13]Snyder C, Aaronson N. Use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. The Lancet. 2009; 374(9687):369-370.
• [14]Valderas J, Alonson J, Guyatt G. Measuring patient-reported outcomes: moving from clinical trials into clinical practice. Medical Journal of Australia. 2008; 189(2):93-94.
• [15]Vallance-Owen A. Measuring patient care: PROMs promote health gain and patient involvement. British Medical Journal. 2008; 336(7640):344.
• [16]Haverman L, Engelen V, van Rossum M, Heymans H, Grootenhuis M. Monitoring health-related quality of life in paediatric practice: development of an innovative web-based application. BMC Pediatrics. 2011; 11(3):1-7.
• [17]Cromby J, Standen P, Brown D. The potentials of virtual environments in the education and training of people with learning disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 1996; 40(6):489-501.
• [18]Davies D, Stock S, Wehmeyer M. Application of computer simulation to teach ATM access to individuals with intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities. 2003; 38:451-456.
• [19]Harrysson B, Svensk A, Johansson G. How people with developmental disabilities navigate the internet. British Journal of Special Education. 2004; 31:138-142.
• [20]Wehmeyer M, Smith S, Palmer S. Technology use and people with mental retardation. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation. 2004; 31:291-337.
• [21]Gringras P, Santosh P, Baird G. Development of an Internet-based real-time system for monitoring pharmacological interventions in children with neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric disorders. Child: Care, Health and Development. 2006; 32(5):591-600.
• [22]Santosh P. STOP study aims to monitor suicidality, 2014: EU Research. p. 36–39.
• [23]Courtemanche A, Schroeder S, Sheldon J. Designs and analyses of psychotropic and behavioral interventions for the treatment of problem behavior among people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. 2011; 116(4):315-328.
• [24]Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. 2006 [cited 2014 7 April]; Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1629006/pdf/1477-7525-4-79.pdf.
• [25]Bren L. The importance of patient-reported outcomes…It’s all about the patients. FDA Consumer. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD; 2006.
• [26]Nunnally J, Bernstein I. Psychometric Theory. 1994.
• [27]Jaeschke R, Guyatt G. A comparison of seven-point and visual analogue scales: Data from a randomized trial. Controlled Clinical Trials. 1990; 11(1):43-51.
• [28]Clark A, Watson D. Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment. 1995; 7(3):309-319.
• [29]Costello A, Osborne J. Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four Recommendations for Getting the Most From Your Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation; 2005.
• [30]Hair J, Tatham R, Anderson R, Black W. Multivariate data analysis. 5th ed. Prentice-Hall, London; 1998.
• [31]Reise S, Waller N, Comrey A. Factor Analysis and Scale Revision. Psychological Assessment. 2000; 12(3):287-297.
• [32]Stevens J. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. 2nd ed. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ; 1992.
• [33]Tabachnick B, and Fidell L. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. 2007: Pearson Education Inc.
• [34]Pappa S, Dazzan P. Spontaneous movement disorders in antipsychotic-naive patients with first-episode psychoses: a systematic review. Psychological Medicine. 2009; 39(7):1065-1076.