Validation of the controlled ovarian stimulation impact measure (COSI): assessing the patient perspective

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Hein Fennema²  Meryl Brod¹ 

[1] The Brod Group, 219 Julia Avenue, Mill Valley, CA 94941, USA;Merck Sharp & Dohme BV, Molenstraat 11, 5342 CC Oss, The Netherlands

关键词: Quality of life;    Controlled ovarian stimulation impact measure;    Validation;    Controlled ovarian stimulation;   

Others  :  823397
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-11-130

 received in 2013-02-26, accepted in 2013-06-27,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) is the first step for in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment, a treatment often described and experienced as stressful to patients and their partners. COS also requires concerted efforts by the patients in administering medication and general compliance to treatment protocols. Little is known about the impacts on patients that may be specific to this important first step in treatment. The absence of a conceptually sound and well-validated measure assessing patient experience and functioning during ovarian stimulation has been an obstacle to understanding the impacts of ovarian stimulation on women pursuing IVF. To address this gap, the Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Impact Measure (COSI) was developed based upon accepted methods for designing patient reported outcome (PRO) measures. The purpose of this study was to psychometrically validate the COSI.

Methods

267 patients from three countries (Ireland, United Kingdom, United States) were administered the COSI. Psychometric validation was conducted according to an a priori statistical analysis plan.

Results

The final 28-item COSI was found to have robust scale structure with four domains: Interference in Daily Life (Work and Home), Injection Burden, Psychological Health and Compliance Worry. Internal consistency of all domains was adequate (between 0.80 to 0.87) as was test-retest reliability (between 0.72-0.87). All a-priori hypotheses for convergent and known-groups validity tests were met.

Conclusions

There is a measurable impact of COS on patient functioning and well-being. The COSI is a well-developed and validated PRO measure of this impact. Future work should include examination of responsiveness and confirmation of concepts in non-western countries.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Brod and Fennema; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Verhaak CM, Smeenk JM, Evers AW, Kremer JA, Kraaimaat FW, Braat DD: Women's emotional adjustment to IVF: a systematic review of 25 years of research. Hum Reprod Update 2007, 13:27-36.
• [2]Hynes GJ, Callan VJ, Terry DJ, Gallois C: The psychological well-being of infertile women after a failed IVF attempt: the effects of coping. Br J Med Psychol 1992, 65(Pt 3):269-278.
• [3]Slade P, Emery J, Lieberman BA: A prospective, longitudinal study of emotions and relationships in in-vitro fertilization treatment. Hum Reprod 1997, 12:183-190.
• [4]Visser AP, Haan G, Zalmstra H, Wouters I: Psychosocial aspects of in vitro fertilization. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1994, 15:35-43.
• [5]Beaurepaire J, Jones M, Thiering P, Saunders D, Tennant C: Psychosocial adjustment to infertility and its treatment: male and female responses at different stages of IVF/ET treatment. J Psychosom Res 1994, 38:229-240.
• [6]Salvatore P, Gariboldi S, Offidani A, Coppola F, Amore M, Maggini C: Psychopathology, personality, and marital relationship in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization procedures. Fertil Steril 2001, 75:1119-1125.
• [7]Ardenti R, Campari C, Agazzi L, La Sala GB: Anxiety and perceptive functioning of infertile women during in-vitro fertilization: exploratory survey of an Italian sample. Hum Reprod 1999, 14:3126-3132.
• [8]Klonoff-Cohen H, Chu E, Natarajan L, Sieber W: A prospective study of stress among women undergoing in vitro fertilization or gamete intrafallopian transfer. Fertil Steril 2001, 76:675-687.
• [9]Yong P, Martin C, Thong J: A comparison of psychological functioning in women at different stages of in vitro fertilization treatment using the mean affect adjective check list. J Assist Reprod Genet 2000, 17:553-556.
• [10]Merari D, Feldberg D, Elizur A, Goldman J, Modan B: Psychological and hormonal changes in the course of in vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet 1992, 9:161-169.
• [11]Boivin J, Takefman JE: Impact of the in-vitro fertilization process on emotional, physical and relational variables. Hum Reprod 1996, 11:903-907.
• [12]Boivin J, Takefman JE: Stress level across stages of in vitro fertilization in subsequently pregnant and nonpregnant women. Fertil Steril 1995, 64:802-810.
• [13]Verhaak CM, Smeenk JM, Eugster A, van Minnen A, Kremer JA, Kraaimaat FW: Stress and marital satisfaction among women before and after their first cycle of in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2001, 76:525-531.
• [14]Lok IH, Lee DT, Cheung LP, Chung WS, Lo WK, Haines CJ: Psychiatric morbidity amongst infertile Chinese women undergoing treatment with assisted reproductive technology and the impact of treatment failure. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2002, 53:195-199.
• [15]Gourounti K, Anagnostopoulos F, Vaslamatzis G: The relation of psychological stress to pregnancy outcome among women undergoing in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Women Health 2011, 51:321-339.
• [16]Smeenk JM, Verhaak CM, Vingerhoets AJ, Sweep CG, Merkus JM, Willemsen SJ, van Minnen A, Straatman H, Braat DD: Stress and outcome success in IVF: the role of self-reports and endocrine variables. Hum Reprod 2005, 20:991-996.
• [17]Campagne DM: Should fertilization treatment start with reducing stress? Hum Reprod 2006, 21:1651-1658.
• [18]Eugster A, Vingerhoets AJ: Psychological aspects of in vitro fertilization: a review. Soc Sci Med 1999, 48:575-589.
• [19]Csemiczky G, Landgren BM, Collins A: The influence of stress and state anxiety on the outcome of IVF-treatment: psychological and endocrinological assessment of Swedish women entering IVF-treatment. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000, 79:113-118.
• [20]Anderheim L, Holter H, Bergh C, Moller A: Does psychological stress affect the outcome of in vitro fertilization? Hum Reprod 2005, 20:2969-2975.
• [21]Brod M, Verhaak CM, Wiebinga CJ, Gerris J, Hoomans EH: Improving clinical understanding of the effect of ovarian stimulation on women's lives. Reprod Biomed Online 2009, 18:391-400.
• [22]U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research: Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research: Center for Devices and Radiological Health: Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures, use in medical product development to support labeling claims. [http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf webcite]
• [23]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. 2nd edition. Edited by Spilker B. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996:49-56.
• [24]The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam: Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:193-205.
• [25]Snoek FJ, Mollema ED, Heine RJ, Bouter LM, van der Ploeg HM: Development and validation of the diabetes fear of injecting and self-testing questionnaire (D-FISQ): first findings. Diabet Med 1997, 14:871-876.
• [26]Endicott J, Nee J, Harrison W, Blumenthal R: Quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire: a new measure. Psychopharmacol Bull 1993, 29:321-326.
• [27]Endicott J, Nee J: Endicott Work Productivity Scale (EWPS): a new measure to assess treatment effects. Psychopharmacol Bull 1997, 33:13-16.
• [28]Wisniewski SR, Rush AJ, Balasubramani GK, Trivedi MH, Nierenberg AA: Self-rated global measure of the frequency, intensity, and burden of side effects. J Psychiatr Pract 2006, 12:71-79.
• [29]Carpenter JS: The hot flash related daily interference scale: a tool for assessing the impact of hot flashes on quality of life following breast cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 2001, 22:979-989.
• [30]Anderson RT, Skovlund SE, Marrero D, Levine DW, Meadows K, Brod M, Balkrishnan R: Development and validation of the insulin treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Clin Ther 2004, 26:565-578.
• [31]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
• [32]Dupuy H: The psychological general well-being (PGWB) index. In Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials of cardiovascular therapies. Edited by Wender N, Mattson M, Furburg C, Elinson J. New York: Le Jacq; 1984:170-183.
• [33]Chronbach LJ: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951, 16:297-334.
• [34]Boivin J, Domar AD, Shapiro DB, Wischmann TH, Fauser BC, Verhaak C: Tackling burden in ART: an integrated approach for medical staff. Hum Reprod 2012, 27:941-950.
• [35]Bleil ME, Pasch LA, Gregorich SE, Millstein SG, Katz PP, Adler NE: Fertility treatment response: is it better to be more optimistic or less pessimistic? Psychosom Med 2012, 74:193-199.
• [36]Verhaak CM, Smeenk JM, van Minnen A, Kremer JA, Kraaimaat FW: A longitudinal, prospective study on emotional adjustment before, during and after consecutive fertility treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2005, 20:2253-2260.