Development and Pretesting of a Questionnaire to Assess Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM Questionnaire)

Patient-reported outcome measures for medication treatment satisfaction: a systematic review of measure development and measurement properties

BACKGROUND

Medication Treatment Satisfaction (M-TS) from the patients' perspective is important for comprehensively evaluating the effect of medicines. The extent to which current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for M-TS are valid, reliable, responsive, and interpretable remains unclear. To assess the measurement properties of existing PROMs for M-TS and to highlight research gaps.

METHODS

Using PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane library (Ovid), IPA (Ovid), PsycINFO, Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Questionnaires biomedical databases, and four Chinese databases, we performed a systematic search for studies addressing the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS. Based on the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, pairs of reviewers independently assessed the measurement properties of the PROMs and rated the quality of evidence on the measurement properties of each PROM. (The Open Science Framework registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8S5ZM ).

RESULTS

This review identified 69 PROMs for M-TS in 114 studies (four generic, 32 disease-specific, and 33 drug-specific) of which 60 were intended for adults. All provided limited or no information regarding interpretability. Most demonstrated appropriate construct validity including convergent validity (39/69) and discriminative or known-groups validity (40/69) (high to moderate quality of evidence). Only a few provided evidence of sufficient content validity (8/69), structural validity (13/69), and internal consistency (11/69). Of 38 PROMs reporting test-retest reliability, results in 24 provided evidence of satisfactory test-retest reliability (18 with high to moderate, 6 with low to very low quality of evidence). Few PROMs reported responsiveness (16/69). Two generic PROMs (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication initial Version 1.4, TSQM-1.4; Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire, SATMED-Q) and one drug-specific PROM (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, ITSQ) demonstrated both satisfactory validity and reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

Most existing PROMs for M-TS require further exploration of measurement properties. Reporting guidelines are needed to enhance the reporting quality of the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS.

Towards the standardisation of adult person-reported outcome domains in diabetes research: A Consensus Statement development panel

Diabetes is unique among chronic diseases because clinical outcomes are intimately tied to how the person living with diabetes reacts to and implements treatment recommendations. It is further characterised by widespread social stigma, judgement and paternalism. This physical, social and psychological burden collectively influences self-management behaviours. It is widely recognised that the individual's perspective about the impact of trying to manage the disease and the burden that self-management confers must be addressed to achieve optimal health outcomes. Standardised, rigorous assessment of mental and behavioural health status, in interaction with physical health outcomes is crucial to aid understanding of person-reported outcomes (PROs). Whilst tempting to conceptualise PROs as an issue of perceived quality of life (QoL), in fact health-related QoL is multi-dimensional and covers indicators of physical or functional health status, psychological and social well-being. This complexity is illuminated by the large number of person reported outcome measures (PROMs) that have been developed across multiple psychosocial domains. Often measures are used inappropriately or because they have been used in the scientific literature rather than based on methodological or outcome assessment rigour. Given the broad nature of psychosocial functioning/mental health, it is important to broadly define PROs that are evaluated in the context of therapeutic interventions, real-life and observational studies. This report summarises the central themes and lessons derived in the assessment and use of PROMs amongst adults with diabetes. Effective assessment of PROMs routinely in clinical research is crucial to understanding the true impact of any intervention. Selecting appropriate measures, relevant to the specific factors of PROs important in the research study will provide valuable data alongside physical health data.

Treatment preference and quality of life impact: ravulizumab vs eculizumab for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome

Aim: Ravulizumab and eculizumab are complement C5 inhibitors approved for the treatment of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS). Ravulizumab requires less frequent infusions than eculizumab, which may reduce treatment burden. This study investigated patients' treatment preferences and the impact of both treatments on patient and caregiver quality of life. Materials & methods: Two surveys were conducted (one for adult patients with aHUS and one for caregivers of pediatric patients with aHUS) to quantitatively assess treatment preference and the patient- and caregiver-reported impact of ravulizumab and eculizumab on quality of life. Patients were required to have a diagnosis of aHUS, to be currently receiving treatment with ravulizumab and to have received prior treatment with eculizumab. Participants were recruited via various sources: the Alexion OneSource™ patient support program, the Rare Patient Voice recruitment agency, the aHUS Foundation and directly via a clinician involved in the study. Results: In total, 50 adult patients (mean age: 46.5 years) and 16 caregivers of pediatric patients (mean age: 10.1 years) completed the surveys. Most adult patients (94.0%) and all caregivers reported an overall preference for ravulizumab over eculizumab; infusion frequency was one of the main factors for patients when selecting their preferred treatment. Fewer patients reported disruption to daily life and the ability to go to work/school due to ravulizumab infusion frequency (4.0% and 5.7%, respectively) than eculizumab infusion frequency (72.0% and 60.0%), with similar results for caregivers. Conclusion: Adult patients and caregivers of pediatric patients indicated an overall preference for ravulizumab than eculizumab for the treatment of aHUS, driven primarily by infusion frequency. This study contributes to the emerging real-world evidence on the treatment impact and preference in patients with aHUS.

Health Related Quality of Life in Interstitial Lung Disease: Can We Use the Same Concepts Around the World?

Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) is increasingly viewed as an important patient-centered outcome by leading health organizations, clinicians, and patients alike. This is especially true in the interstitial lung disease community where patients often struggle with progressive and debilitating disease with few therapeutic options. In order to test the effectiveness of new pharmacologic therapies and non-pharmacologic interventions globally in ILD, this will require expansion of clinical research studies to a multinational level and HRQOL will be an important endpoint to many. In order to successfully expand trials across multiple nations and compare the results of studies between different communities we must recognize that there are differences in the concepts of HRQOL across the world and have strategies to address these differences. In this review, we will describe the different global influences on HRQOL both generally and in the context of ILD, discuss the processes of linguistic translation and cross-cultural adaptation of HRQOL Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), and highlight the gaps and opportunities for improving HRQOL measurement in ILD across the world.

Patient-centered Outcomes Research in Interstitial Lung Disease: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: In the past two decades, many advances have been made to our understanding of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the way we approach its treatment. Despite this, many questions remain unanswered, particularly those related to how the disease and its therapies impact outcomes that are most important to patients. There is currently a lack of guidance on how to best define and incorporate these patient-centered outcomes in ILD research. Objectives: To summarize the current state of patient-centered outcomes research in ILD, identify gaps in knowledge and research, and highlight opportunities and methods for future patient-centered research agendas in ILD. Methods: An international interdisciplinary group of experts was assembled. The group identified top patient-centered outcomes in ILD, reviewed available literature for each outcome, highlighted important discoveries and knowledge gaps, and formulated research recommendations. Results: The committee identified seven themes around patient-centered outcomes as the focus of the statement. After a review of the literature and expert committee discussion, we developed 28 research recommendations. Conclusions: Patient-centered outcomes are key to ascertaining whether and how ILD and interventions used to treat it affect the way patients feel and function in their daily lives. Ample opportunities exist to conduct additional work dedicated to elevating and incorporating patient-centered outcomes in ILD research.

Reliability and Validity of the Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in Persons with Arterial Hypertension

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in persons with arterial hypertension undergoing pharmacological treatment, along with its convergent validity with degree of control of blood pressure levels, therapeutic adherence, and tolerability of antihypertensive drugs.

METHODS

Observational cross-sectional study conducted on a sample of 484 persons. Treatment satisfaction was evaluated with the SATMED-Q, an instrument consisting of 17 items with six dimensions. Other variables were blood pressure, antihypertensive drugs, adverse effects, therapeutic adherence, and participants' characteristics.

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha was 0.916. Factor analysis revealed six factors that could account for 89.97% of total variance. The test-retest reliability analysis yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.910 (95% CI = 0.806-0.959). In a possible range of 0 through 100 points, participant satisfaction with treatment ranged from 38.2 to 100 (mean 79.9 (SD = 12.9; 95% CI = 78.8-81.0); median 80.9). SATMED-Q scores were higher among persons who reported experiencing no adverse effects (82.5 ± 11.6 SD vs. 68.7 ± 11.9 SD; p < 0.001). Satisfaction levels were significantly lower among subjects not complying with the treatment (73.2 ± 12.9 vs. 82.1 ± 12.1; p < 0.001), and significantly higher among those presenting with controlled blood pressure levels (82.1 ± 12.1 SD vs. 77.5 ± 13.3 SD; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The SATMED-Q showed high internal consistency and good stability in the reliability analysis. It is an appropriate instrument for evaluating satisfaction with antihypertensive treatment, both in routine clinical practice and in community pharmacy or clinical research settings.

Translation, Pilot Psychometric Validation, and Comparative Performance of the Arabic Version of the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS)

Background

Anticoagulation management is a complex process that is managed through careful monitoring, and patient satisfaction has a significant impact. Given the lack of a valid and reliable tool in Arabic to examine patient satisfaction, the present study aimed to translate and examine some of the psychometric properties of the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) among Saudi patients.

Materials and Methods

This was a cross-sectional, methodological study conducted among patients receiving warfarin. The questionnaire was subjected to translation by using a multistep method. The final Arabic translated version of the ACTS underwent face and content validity assessments by independent experts to ensure its conceptual equivalence to the original English version. Subsequently, pilot testing of convergent, discriminant, and criterion validities were examined.

Results

Overall, 136 patients participated in the study. All patients were asked to complete the generic Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) alongside the ACTS tool. Convergent validity analyses revealed statistically significant positive correlations (p < 0.01) between the ACTS subscales and the four TSQM subdomains, as reflected by the Spearman correlation coefficient (r). Interestingly, the strongest correlations were observed between ACTS Burdens and the TSQM convenience domain (r = 0.61) and between ACTS Benefits and the TSQM effectiveness satisfaction score (r = 0.58). Similarly, discriminant validity was evidenced by moderate to high significant loading of all 12 items on each of their corresponding ACTS subscales.

Conclusion

These findings of adequate validity support the use of the ACTS in Saudi patients receiving anticoagulant medications to measure their specific satisfaction levels with this type of therapy. However, future research addressing the clinical impact of ACTS scores in the Saudi population is needed.

Patient expectations, experiences and satisfaction with nintedanib and pirfenidone in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a quantitative study

Background

Two antifibrotic drugs, nintedanib and pirfenidone, are available for treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Although efficacy and adverse events have been well studied, little is known about patient experiences with these drugs. We aimed to systematically and quantitatively evaluate patient expectations, experiences, and satisfaction with nintedanib and pirfenidone. Furthermore, we assessed which factors were associated with overall patient satisfaction with medication.

Methods

Outpatients with IPF prospectively completed the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medication (PESaM) questionnaire before start, and after three and 6 months of antifibrotic treatment, as part of a randomized eHealth trial (NCT03420235). The PESaM questionnaire consists of an expectation module, a validated generic module evaluating patient experiences and satisfaction concerning the effectiveness, side-effects, and ease of use of a medication, and a disease-specific module about IPF. Satisfaction was scored on a scale from − 5 (very dissatisfied) to + 5 (very satisfied).

Results

In total, 90 patients were included, of whom 43% used nintedanib and 57% pirfenidone. After 6 months, the mean overall score for satisfaction with medication was 2.1 (SD 1.9). No differences were found in experiences and satisfaction with medication, and the number and severity of side-effects between nintedanib and pirfenidone. Perceived effectiveness of medication was rated as significantly more important than side-effects and ease of use (p = 0.001). Expectations of patients regarding effectiveness were higher than experiences after 6 months. Self-reported experience with effectiveness was the main factor associated with overall medication satisfaction.

Conclusions

Patient experiences and satisfaction with antifibrotic treatment were fairly positive, and similar for nintedanib and pirfenidone. Systematic evaluation of patient expectations, experiences, and satisfaction with medication could enhance shared-decision making and guide drug treatment decisions in the future.

Trial registration

NCT03420235.

Assessing Preferences for Rare Disease Treatment: Qualitative Development of the Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria Patient Preference Questionnaire (PNH-PPQ©)

PURPOSE

To develop a patient preference questionnaire (PPQ) assessing eculizumab and ravulizumab treatment for paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The development of the PNH-PPQ© was consistent with Food and Drug Administration guidelines for patient-reported outcome measure development, and included 1) a targeted literature review; 2) PNH expert clinician input on treatment preferences; 3) review of existing qualitative data on the PNH treatment and disease experience; 4) concept elicitation interviews with 8 PNH patients who received eculizumab and/or ravulizumab; 5) translatability review; and 6) cognitive debriefing with 5 patients. Interview participants were recruited through a United Kingdom PNH patient advocacy group and a Canadian clinical site involved in clinical trial ALXN1210-PNH-302.

RESULTS

Six themes were identified as most relevant to the PNH treatment experience from the concept elicitation interviews: disease symptoms (n=8/8); treatment frequency (n=7/8); quality of life impact of treatment/disease (n=7/8); treatment burden (n=7/8); treatment efficacy (n=5/8); and treatment side effects (n=5/8). An initial list of 88 preference questions was reduced to 11 highly relevant and non-redundant questions reflecting the 6 themes. Cognitive interview participants unanimously agreed that the PNH-PPQ instructions were clear; response options were understandable, easy to use, and provided enough choices; and the questions captured the factors that inform treatment preferences.

DISCUSSION

When new drugs have similar efficacy to existing medications, documenting patient preferences is important for confirming patient benefit from the new medication. Understanding what matters most to patients is essential for delivering patient-centered care and may play a particularly significant role in treatment decision making. The availability of such a tool may be especially important as new orphan drugs are developed and patients with rare diseases have more than one treatment option to consider.

CONCLUSION

The PNH-PPQ provides a patient-centered approach for evaluating preferences for the treatment of PNH. The PNH-PPQ has subsequently assessed patient preference in the clinical trial sub-study ALXN1210-PNH-302s.

Development and Psychometric Assessment of the Methadone Therapy Experiences Questionnaire among Patients under Treatment

BACKGROUND

Patient experiences play an important role in the quality of health care and gathering patients' experiences is common as part of quality measurement in health care. The present study was carried out with the aim of developing and psychometric analysis of the methadone therapy experiences questionnaire among patients under treatment with methadone.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was performed in 2018 and 200 patients referred to the addiction treatment clinics in Kerman, Iran, participated in this study. The convenient sampling method was employed. The validity was assessed using the opinions of 50 individuals similar to the target population and 8 experts. In addition, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was utilized to examine the test-retest reliability. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics in the SPSS software.

FINDINGS

The face validity of the questionnaire was acceptable in the present study and the values for content validity were higher than 0.79, indicating the appropriate content validity of the questionnaire [content validity index (CVI) = 0.82 and content validity ratio (CVR) = 0.83]. Moreover, the results confirmed the reliability or reproducibility of the questionnaire (Cronbach's alpha = 0.83).

CONCLUSION

The methadone therapy experiences questionnaire was of a good validity and reliability among the patients. In the clinical area, the psychiatrists, psychologists, authorities, and staff in addiction treatment clinics can identify the quality of treatment and its strengths and weaknesses using this questionnaire.

Validity of the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) Questionnaire

Background

This study assessed the validity and reliability of the generic module of the recently developed Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) questionnaire in a sample of patients in the Netherlands.

Methods

The generic module of the PESaM questionnaire consists of 18 items related to the domains effectiveness, side effects and ease of use of medications. It assesses patients’ experiences regarding the impact of the medication on daily life, health and satisfaction. In 2017, the PESaM questionnaire was sent out to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients using pirfenidone or nintedanib, atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome patients receiving eculizumab and patients using tacrolimus after kidney transplantation. Mean scores for each domain were calculated applying a scoring algorithm. Construct validity and reliability were assessed using recommended methods.

Results

188 participants completed the generic module, of whom 48% used pirfenidone, 36% nintedanib, 11% tacrolimus and 5% eculizumab. The generic module has good structural properties. Internal consistency values of the domains were satisfactory (i.e. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha above 0.7). Confirmatory factor analysis provided further evidence for construct validity, with good convergent and discriminant validity. The PESaM questionnaire also showed different scores for patients using different medications, in line with expectations, and was therefore able to differentiate between patient groups. Test–retest reliability of the items and domains were rated as moderate to fair (i.e. intraclass coefficients ranged between 0.18 and 0.76).

Conclusions

The PESaM questionnaire is a unique patient-reported outcome measure evaluating patient experiences and satisfaction with medications. It has been developed in conjunction with patients, ensuring coverage of domains and issues relevant from the patient’s perspective. This study has shown promising validity of the generic module of the PESaM questionnaire. Further research is recommended to assess reliability in greater detail as well as the responsiveness of the measure.

Trial registration

The study is registered in The Netherlands National Trial Register (Trial Code 5860).

Patients' perceptions and patient-reported outcomes in progressive-fibrosing interstitial lung diseases

The effects of interstitial lung disease (ILD) create a significant burden on patients, unsettling almost every domain of their lives, disrupting their physical and emotional well-being and impairing their quality of life (QoL). Because many ILDs are incurable, and there are limited reliably-effective, life-prolonging treatment options available, the focus of many therapeutic interventions has been on improving or maintaining how patients with ILD feel and function, and by extension, their QoL. Such patient-centred outcomes are best assessed by patients themselves through tools that capture their perceptions, which inherently incorporate their values and judgements. These patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) can be used to assess an array of constructs affected by a disease or the interventions implemented to treat it. Here, we review the impact of ILD that may present with a progressive-fibrosing phenotype on patients' lives and examine how PROs have been used to measure that impact and the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions.

Integrating Patient Perspectives into Personalized Medicine in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive and ultimately fatal disease which has a major impact on patients' quality of life (QOL). Except for lung transplantation, there is no curative treatment option. Fortunately, two disease-modifying drugs that slow down disease decline were recently approved. Though this is a major step forward, these drugs do not halt or reverse the disease, nor convincingly improve health-related QOL. In daily practice, disease behavior and response to therapy greatly vary among patients. It is assumed that this is related to the multiple biological pathways and complex interactions between genetic, molecular, and environmental factors that are involved in the pathogenesis of IPF. Recently, research in IPF has therefore started to focus on developing targeted therapy through identifying genetic risk factors and biomarkers. In this rapidly evolving field of personalized medicine, patient factors such as lifestyle, comorbidities, preferences, and experiences with medication should not be overlooked. This review describes recent insights and methods on how to integrate patient perspectives into personalized medicine. Furthermore, it provides an overview of the most used patient-reported outcome measures in IPF, to facilitate choices for both researchers and clinicians when incorporating the patient voice in their research and care. To enhance truly personalized treatment in IPF, biology should be combined with patient perspectives.