A disease-specific questionnaire for measuring patient-reported outcomes and experiences in the Swedish National Diabetes Register: Development and evaluation of content validity, face validity, and test-retest reliability

Standardising personalised diabetes care across European health settings: A person-centred outcome set agreed in a multinational Delphi study

OBJECTIVE

Standardised person-reported outcomes (PRO) data can contextualise clinical outcomes enabling precision diabetes monitoring and care. Comprehensive outcome sets can guide this process, but their implementation in routine diabetes care has remained challenging and unsuccessful at international level. We aimed to address this by developing a person-centred outcome set for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, using a methodology with prospects for increased implementability and sustainability in international health settings.

METHODS

We used a three-round questionnaire-based Delphi study to reach consensus on the outcome set. We invited key stakeholders from 19 countries via purposive snowball sampling, namely people with diabetes (N = 94), healthcare professionals (N = 65), industry (N = 22) and health authorities (N = 3), to vote on the relevance and measurement frequency of 64 previously identified clinical and person-reported outcomes. Subsequent consensus meetings concluded the study.

RESULTS

The list of preliminary outcomes was shortlisted via the consensus process to 46 outcomes (27 clinical outcomes and 19 PROs). Two main collection times were recommended: (1) linked to a medical visit (e.g. diabetes-specific well-being, symptoms and psychological health) and (2) annually (e.g. clinical data, general well-being and diabetes self management-related outcomes).

CONCLUSIONS

PROs are often considered in a non-standardised way in routine diabetes care. We propose a person-centred outcome set for diabetes, specifically considering psychosocial and behavioural aspects, which was agreed by four international key stakeholder groups. It guides standardised collection of meaningful outcomes at scale, supporting individual and population level healthcare decision making. It will be implemented and tested in Europe as part of the H2O project.

Mixed methods study on the feasibility of implementing periodic continuous glucose monitoring among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a primary care setting

Background

Health care professionals (HCPs) play a central role in leveraging technologies to support individuals with diabetes. This mixed-method study was completed to determine the feasibility of implementing periodic continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in a primary care setting.

Aim

This study aimed to evaluate and describe the experiences of using periodic CGM with data visualization tools in patients with type 2 diabetes to foster a person-centered approach in a primary care setting.

Methods

Fifty outpatients aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, and with a disease duration of at least 2 years were included in this study. Data were collected from April 2021 to January 2022. Patients completed a single period of sensor measurements for 28 days and a diabetes questionnaire about feelings and experiences of health care. HbA1c was also measured. A focus group interview was conducted to evaluate and describe the HCPs experiences of using periodic CGM.

Results

Patients reported to HCPs that the CGM device was comfortable to wear and noted that LibreView was easy to use when scanning the sensor to obtain and visualize the glucose levels and trends. Data availability of CGM data was >70 %.Clinical observations revealed a mean reduction in HbA1c, mmol/mol from 60.06 [7.65 %] at baseline to 55.42 [7.20 %] after 4 weeks (p < 0.001). Two categories were identified: 1) Fostering dialogue on self-care and 2) Promoting understanding.

Conclusions

The HCPs and participants in this study had a positive experience or viewed the implementation of periodic CGM with data visualization tools as a positive experience and appeared to be feasible for implementation in a primary care setting.

Which diabetes specific patient reported outcomes should be measured in routine care? A systematic review to inform a core outcome set for adults with Type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus: The European Health Outcomes Observatory (H2O) programme

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to identify candidate patient reported outcomes with potential to inform individual patient care and service development for inclusion in a digital outcome set to be collected in routine care, as part of an international project to enhance care outcomes for people with diabetes.

METHODS

PubMed, COSMIN and COMET databases were searched. Published studies were included if they recommended patient reported outcomes that were clinically useful and/or important to people with diabetes. To aid selection decisions, recommended outcomes were considered in terms of the evidence endorsing them and their importance to people with diabetes.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies recommending 53 diabetes specific outcomes, and patient reported outcome measures, were included. The outcomes reflected the experience of living with diabetes (e.g. psychological well-being, symptom experience, health beliefs and stigma) and behaviours (e.g. self-management). Diabetes distress and self-management behaviours were most endorsed by the evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The review provides a comprehensive list of candidate outcomes endorsed by international evidence and informed by existing outcome sets, and suggestions for measures.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The review offers evidence to guide clinical application. Integrated measurement of these outcomes in care settings holds enormous potential to improve provision of care and outcomes in diabetes.

Patient-reported outcomes for people with diabetes: what and how to measure? A narrative review

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.

Response rates in clinical quality registries and databases that collect patient reported outcome measures: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are being increasingly introduced in clinical registries, providing a personal perspective on the expectations and impact of treatment. The aim of this study was to describe response rates (RR) to PROMs in clinical registries and databases and to examine the trends over time, and how they change with the registry type, region and disease or condition captured.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping literature review of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature. All English studies on clinical registries capturing PROMs at one or more time points were included. Follow up time points were defined as follows: baseline (if available), < 1 year, 1 to < 2 years, 2 to < 5 years, 5 to < 10 years and 10 + years. Registries were grouped according to regions of the world and health conditions. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify trends in RRs over time. These included calculating average RRs, standard deviation and change in RRs according to total follow up time.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 1,767 publications. Combined with 20 reports and four websites, a total of 141 sources were used in the data extraction and analysis process. Following the data extraction, 121 registries capturing PROMs were identified. The overall average RR at baseline started at 71% and decreased to 56% at 10 + year at follow up. The highest average baseline RR of 99% was observed in Asian registries and in registries capturing data on chronic conditions (85%). Overall, the average RR declined as follow up time increased.

CONCLUSION

A large variation and downward trend in PROMs RRs was observed in most of the registries identified in our review. Formal recommendations are required for consistent collection, follow up and reporting of PROMs data in a registry setting to improve patient care and clinical practice. Further research studies are needed to determine acceptable RRs for PROMs captured in clinical registries.

Development of the Malay Language of understanding, attitude, practice and health literacy questionnaire on COVID-19 (MUAPHQ C-19): content validity & face validity analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the content and face validity index of the development of the understanding, attitude, practice and health literacy questionnaire on COVID-19 (MUAPHQ C-19) in the Malay language.

METHODS

The development of the MUAPHQ C-19 was conducted in two stages. Stage I resulted in the generation of the instrument's items (development), and stage II resulted in the performance of the instrument's items (judgement and quantification). Six-panel experts related to the study field and ten general public participated to evaluate the validity of the MUAPHQ C-19. The content validity index (CVI), content validity ratio (CVR) and face validity index (FVI) were analysed using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

There were 54 items and four domains, namely the understanding, attitude, practice and health literacy towards COVID-19, identified in the MUAPHQ C-19 (Version 1.0). The scale-level CVI (S-CVI/Ave) for every domain was above 0.9, which is considered acceptable. The CVR for all items was above 0.7, except for one item in the health literacy domain. Ten items were revised to improve the item's clarity, and two items were deleted due to the low CVR value and redundancy, respectively. The I-FVI exceeded the cut-off value of 0.83 except for five items from the attitude domain and four from the practice domains. Thus, seven of these items were revised to increase the clarity of items, while another two were deleted due to low I-FVI scores. Otherwise, the S-FVI/Ave for every domain exceeded the cut-off point of 0.9, which is considered acceptable. Thus, 50-item MUAPHQ C-19 (Version 3.0) was generated following the content and face validity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The questionnaire development, content validity, and face validity process are lengthy and iterative. The assessment of the instruments' items by the content experts and the respondents is essential to guarantee the instrument's validity. Our content and face validity study has finalised the MUAPHQ C-19 version that is ready for the next phase of questionnaire validation, using Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Patient-reported outcome measures for assessing health-related quality of life in people with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are important tools to assess outcomes relevant to patients, with Health-Related Quality Of Life (HRQOL) as an important construct to be measured. Many different HRQOL PROMs are used in the type 2 diabetes field, however a complete overview of these PROMs is currently lacking. We therefore aimed to systematically describe and classify the content of all PROMs that have specifically been developed or validated to measure (aspects of) HRQOL in people with type 2 diabetes. A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE until 31 December 2021. Studies on the development or validation of a PROM measuring HRQOL, or aspects of HRQOL, in people with type 2 diabetes were included. Title and abstract and full-text screening were conducted by two independent researchers and data extraction was performed independently by one of the researchers. Data were extracted on language in which the PROM was developed, target population, construct(s) being measured, names of (sub)scales and number of items per (sub)scale. In addition, all PROMs and subscales were classified according to specific aspects of HRQOL based on the Wilson & Cleary model (symptom status, functional status, general health perceptions) to aid researchers in PROM selection. In total 220 studies were identified that developed or validated PROMs that measure (aspects of) HRQOL in people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 116 unique HRQOL PROMs, 91 (of the subscales) measured symptom status, 60 measured functional status and 26 measured general health perceptions. In addition, 16 of the PROMs (subscales) measured global quality of life. 61 of the 116 PROMs (subscales) also include characteristics of the individual (e.g. aspects of personality, coping) or environment (e.g. social or financial support) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs, e.g. measure of a patient's perception of their personal experience of the healthcare they have received, e.g. treatment satisfaction), which are not part of the HRQOL construct. Only 9 of the 116 PROMs measure all aspects of HRQOL based on the Wilson & Cleary model. Finally, 8 of the 116 PROMs stating to measure HRQOL, measured no HRQOL construct. In conclusion, a large number of PROMs are available for people with type 2 diabetes, which intend to measure (aspects of) HRQOL. These PROMs measure a large variety of (sub)constructs, which are not all HRQOL constructs, with a small amount of PROMs not measuring HRQOL at all. There is a need for consensus on which aspects of HRQOL should be measured in people with type 2 diabetes and which PROMs to use in research and daily practice. PROSPERO: CRD42017071012. COMET database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/956 .

Content Validity of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Developed for Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aimed to systematically evaluate the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) specifically developed to measure (aspects of) health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people with type 2 diabetes. A systematic review was performed in PubMed and Embase of PROMs measuring perceived symptoms, physical function, mental function, social function/participation, and general health perceptions, and that were validated to at least some extent. Content validity (relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility) was evaluated using COSMIN methodology.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified 54 (different versions of) PROMs, containing 150 subscales. We found evidence for sufficient content validity for only 41/150 (27%) (subscales of) PROMs. The quality of evidence was generally very low. We found 66 out of 150 (44%) (subscales of) PROMs with evidence for either insufficient relevance, insufficient comprehensiveness, or insufficient comprehensibility. For measuring diabetes-specific symptoms, physical function, mental function, social function/participation, and general health perceptions, we identified one to 11 (subscales of) PROMs with sufficient content validity, although quality of the evidence was generally low. For measuring depressive symptoms, no PROM with sufficient content validity was identified. For each aspect of HRQL, we found at least one PROM with sufficient content validity, except for depressive symptoms. The quality of the evidence was mostly very low.

Implementing the Digital Diabetes Questionnaire as a Clinical Tool in Routine Diabetes Care: Focus Group Discussions With Patients and Health Care Professionals

BACKGROUND

The Diabetes Questionnaire is a digital patient-reported outcome and experience measure for adults living with diabetes. The Diabetes Questionnaire is intended for use in routine clinical visits in diabetes care and to enable patient perspectives to be integrated into the Swedish National Diabetes Register. The Diabetes Questionnaire was developed on the basis of patients' perspectives, and evidence for its measurement qualities has been demonstrated. Patients receive an invitation to complete the questionnaire before clinical visits, and the patient and health care professional (HCP) can discuss the findings, which are instantly displayed during the visit. Implementation processes for new tools in routine care need to be studied to understand the influence of contextual factors, the support needed, and how patients and HCPs experience clinical use.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe patients' and HCPs' experiences of initiating the use of the digital Diabetes Questionnaire as a clinical tool in routine diabetes care, supported by a structured implementation strategy involving initial education, local facilitators, and regular follow-ups.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, semistructured focus group discussions were conducted 12 months after the use of the Diabetes Questionnaire was initiated. Participants were diabetes specialist nurses and physicians (20 participants in 4 groups) at hospital-based outpatient clinics or primary health care clinics and adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes (15 participants in 4 groups). The audiotaped transcripts were analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The results revealed 2 main categories that integrated patients' and HCPs' experiences, which together formed an overarching theme: While implementation demands new approaches, the Diabetes Questionnaire provides a broader perspective. The first main category (The Diabetes Questionnaire supports person-centered clinical visits) comprised comments expressing that the digital Diabetes Questionnaire can initiate and encourage reflection in preparation for clinical visits, bring important topics to light during clinical visits, and broaden the scope of discussion by providing additional information. The second main category (The process of initiating the implementation of the Diabetes Questionnaire) comprised comments that described differences in engagement among HCPs and their managers, challenges of establishing new routines, experiences of support during implementation, thoughts about the Diabetes Questionnaire, need to change local administrative routines, and opportunities and concerns for continued use.

CONCLUSIONS

The Diabetes Questionnaire can broaden the scope of health data in routine diabetes care. While implementation demands new approaches, patients and HCPs saw potential positive impacts of using the questionnaire at both the individual and group levels. Our results can inform further development of implementation strategies to support the clinical use of the questionnaire.

Challenges in Measuring What Matters to Patients With Diabetes. Comment on "Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review"

Collapse

Individual goal-based plan based on nursing theory for adults with type 2 diabetes and self-care deficits: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence and costs of type 2 diabetes are increasing worldwide. A cornerstone in the treatment and care of diabetes is supporting each patient in self-management. In Sweden, most patients with type 2 diabetes are cared for in the primary care setting, which is heavily burdened. Because of implementation difficulties regarding evidenced-based diabetes self-management education and support in this setting, there is a need for an instrument that is easy to use and implement. We developed an individual care plan based on the self-care deficit nursing theory of Dorothea Orem as an instrument to facilitate more individualised self-care support for patients with type 2 diabetes. In this study, we aim to determine whether a written, theory-based, individual goal-based plan for patients with type 2 diabetes and self-management deficits can affect their glycaemic control and health-related quality of life, as well as their experiences of living with diabetes and of support from diabetes care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study design is a randomised controlled trial using a quantitative approach. A total of 110 patients will be included. Additionally, a qualitative interview study will be conducted 12 months after the intervention. The primary outcome will be glycosylated haemoglobin levels. Secondary outcomes will be health-related quality of life measured using the RAND-36, and the patient's experience of living with diabetes and of the support from diabetes care measured using the Diabetes Questionnaire. Quantitative data will be analysed using the paired t-test, unpaired t-test, and Mann-Whitney U test with IBM SPSS V.26.0 software. Qualitative content analysis will be used for qualitative data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Ethical Review Authority in Uppsala, Sweden (Etikprövningsmyndigheten, Uppsala, Sverige) (Dnr: 2020-03421). The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10030245.

Patient-Reported Experience and Outcome Measures in People Living with Diabetes: A Scoping Review of Instruments

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus is a global public health concern, with over 463 million people living with this chronic disease. Pathology complexity, management difficulty, and limited participation in care has resulted in healthcare systems seeking new strategies to engage people living with diabetes. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were developed to address the gap between the healthcare system expectation and patient preference.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review the existing literature on PREMs and PROMs specific to type 1 and 2 diabetes, and report the dimensions report the dimensions they have measured.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted from January 1985 to March 2020 of six databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, Scopus, and BiblioPro, to identify PREM and PROM instruments specific for type 1 and 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

Overall, 34 instruments were identified, 32 PROMs and two PREMs. The most common instrument included outcomes related to quality of life at 44% (n = 15), followed by satisfaction (whether with treatment, device, and healthy habits) at 26% (n = 9). Furthermore, instruments regarding personal well-being accounted for 15% (n = 5). For instruments that measure experiences of persons with diabetes, there were two scales of symptoms, and one related to the attitude patients have toward the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes-specific validated instruments mainly focus on quality of life, education, and treatment, and sometimes overlap each other, in their subscales and assessment dimensions. Constructs such as cultural and religious beliefs, leisure, and work life may need more attention. There appears to be a gap in instruments to measure experiences of individuals who "live with diabetes" and seek to lead a "normal life."

The participatory development of a national core set of person-centred diabetes outcome constructs for use in routine diabetes care across healthcare sectors

BACKGROUND

This study sought to utilise participatory research methods to identify the perspectives of people with diabetes regarding which diabetes outcomes were most important to them. These findings were then used to support an expert working group representing multiple health sectors and healthcare disciplines and people with diabetes to establish a core set of patient-important outcome constructs for use in routine diabetes care.

METHODS

26 people with diabetes and family members were recruited through purposive sampling to participate in interviews, focus groups, voting and plenary activities in order to be part of identifying outcome constructs. Content and qualitative analysis methods were used with literature reviews to inform a national multi-stakeholder consensus process for a core set of person-centred diabetes outcome constructs to be used in routine diabetes care across health care settings.

RESULTS

21 people with diabetes and 5 family members representing type 1 and 2 diabetes and a range of age groups, treatment regimens and disease burden identified the following patient-reported outcome constructs as an important supplement to clinical indicators for outcome assessment in routine diabetes care: self-rated health, psychological well-being, diabetes related emotional distress and quality of life, symptom distress, treatment burden, blood sugar regulation and hypoglycemia burden, confidence in self-management and confidence in access to person-centred care and support. Consensus was reached by a national multi-stakeholder expert group to adopt measures of these constructs as a national core diabetes outcome set for use in routine value-based diabetes care.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that patient-reported outcome (PRO) constructs and clinical indicators are needed in core diabetes outcome sets to evaluate outcomes of diabetes care which reflect key needs and priorities of people with diabetes. The incorporation of patient-reported outcome constructs should be considered complementary to clinical indicators in multi-stakeholder value-based health care strategies. We found participatory research methods were useful in facilitating the identification of a core prioritised set of diabetes outcome constructs for routine value-based diabetes care. The use of our method for involving patients may be useful for similar efforts in other disease areas aimed at defining suitable outcomes of person-centred value-based care. Future research should focus on developing acceptable and psychometrically valid measurement instruments to evaluate these outcome constructs as part of routine diabetes care.

Validating the effects of the environmental regulation compliance scale: evidence from the Nigerian oil and gas industry

Growing environmental deterioration has caused many countries to tighten their environmental regulations across the globe. Recent studies show that most developed countries enforced stricter environmental regulations creating a pollution haven to developing countries such as Nigeria. Studies show the non-availability of an environmental regulation compliance scale in the energy sectors. The aim of this paper is to validate the effects of environmental regulation compliance scale for oil and gas companies' operations in the Nigerian oil and gas industry. Hence, an adapted questionnaire comprising 11 items was administered to 300 local and multinational oil and gas companies in Nigeria. All the items were subjected to evaluations and validations by eight expert reviewers with cognate experience in oil and gas activities. Evaluation of the reliability and validity of the measures of the environmental regulation scale was performed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using SPSS version 25 and PLS-SEM version 3.8. The results provide evidence that the environmental regulation compliance scale has met the reliability and validity criteria. Consequently, policymakers, practitioners, and researchers can adapt this scale to assess the effects of environmental regulation compliance by companies in different jurisdictions across the globe. This study undoubtedly builds the existing literature and contributes to the subject area; by implication, the validated scale will assist host oil and gas countries with stringent environmental regulations to come up with policies in such a way as to ensure not chasing away the current investors or discouraging prospective ones from investing in their countries.

New Diabetes Questionnaire to add patients' perspectives to diabetes care for adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: nationwide cross-sectional study of construct validity assessing associations with generic health-related quality of life and clinical variables

OBJECTIVES

To study evidence for construct validity, the aim was to describe the outcome from the recently developed Diabetes Questionnaire, assess the associations of that outcome with clinical variables and generic health-related quality of life, and study the sensitivity to differences between clinically relevant groups of glycaemic control in adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in a nation-wide setting.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Swedish diabetes care clinics connected to the National Diabetes Register (NDR).

PARTICIPANTS

Among 2479 adults with type 1 diabetes and 2469 with type 2 diabetes selected at random from the NDR, 1373 (55.4%) with type 1 and 1353 (54.8%) with type 2 diabetes chose to participate.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The Diabetes Questionnaire, the generic 36-item Short Form version 2 (SF-36v2) health survey and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Related to the prespecified assumptions, supporting evidence for construct validity for the Diabetes Questionnaire was found. Supporting divergent validity, the statistically significant correlations with the clinical variables were few and weak. In relation to the SF-36v2 and in support of convergent validity, the strongest correlations were seen in the Diabetes Questionnaire scales General Well-being and Mood and Energy. In those scales, machine learning analyses showed that about 40%-45% of the variance was explained by the SF-36v2 results and clinical variables. In multiple regression analyses among three groups with differing levels of glycated haemoglobin adjusted for demographics, other risk factors, and diabetes complications, the high-risk group had, in support of sensitivity to clinically relevant groups, statistically significant lower scores than the well-controlled group in most Diabetes Questionnaire scales.

CONCLUSIONS

This nation-wide study shows that the Diabetes Questionnaire captures some generic health-related quality-of-life dimensions, in addition to adding diabetes-specific information not covered by the SF-36v2 and clinical variables. The Diabetes Questionnaire is also sensitive to differences between clinically relevant groups of glycaemic control.

Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Perceptions of the Potential of Using the Digital Diabetes Questionnaire to Prepare for Diabetes Care Meetings: Qualitative Focus Group Interview Study

Background

In effective diabetes management, it is important that providers and health care systems prioritize the delivery of patient-centered care and that they are respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences and barriers.

Objective

The objective of the study was to conduct focus group interviews to capture patients’ and health care professionals’ perceptions and attitudes regarding digital technology and to explore how the digital Diabetes Questionnaire can be used to support patient participation in diabetes care, as a basis for an implementation study.

Methods

A qualitative study was conducted with six focus group discussions with diabetes specialist nurses and medical doctors (n=29) and four focus group discussions with individuals with diabetes (n=23). A semistructured focus group interview guide was developed, including probing questions. The data were transcribed verbatim, and qualitative content analysis was performed using an inductive approach.

Results

Two main categories were revealed by the qualitative analysis: perceptions of digital technology and the digital questionnaire in diabetes management and care and perceptions of participation in diabetes care. An overarching theme that emerged from the focus group interviews was patients’ and professionals’ involvement in diabetes care using digital tools.

Conclusions

The analysis identified important factors to consider when introducing the digital Diabetes Questionnaire in clinical use. Both professionals and patients need support and training in the practical implementation of the digital questionnaire, as well as the opportunity to provide feedback on the questionnaire answers.

Validating oil and gas royalty rate measurement scale: evidence from Nigeria

Purpose

This study aims to validate the royalty rate measurement scale by using rigorous scale validation procedures.

Design/methodology/approach

Evaluation of reliability and validity of the measures of royalty rate was performed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using SPSS version 25 and PLS-SEM version 3.8.

Findings

The results provide evidence that the royalty rate measurement scale has achieved reliability and validity criteria.

Research limitations/implications

Consequently, policymakers, practitioners and researchers can adopt this scale to assess the royalty rate in other energy sectors where royalty arrangements exist in different jurisdictions across the globe.

Practical implications

The practical contributions of the study are threefold. First, the validated scale presented in Table IV can serve as a checklist for oil and gas producing countries while assessing the stringiness or otherwise of their royalty rates. Second, the validated scale can be used to assess the perception of oil and gas companies with regards to the royalty rate as whether the rate is too high and worrisome or is acceptable. Finally, it could also be used to assess the role of regulatory bodies in assessing royalty rates while dealing with multinational and local oil companies. Eventually, the scale can assist policymakers across the globe to adapt in investment decision-making, particularly regarding royalty arrangement.

Originality/value

This study undoubtedly builds the existing literature and contributes to the subject area; by implication, the validated scale will assist host oil and gas countries with stringent royalty rate to revise the royalty policy in such a way to ensure neutrality, thereby not chasing away the current investors or discouraging prospective ones from investing in their oil and gas industry.

Quality of life in chronic conditions using patient-reported measures and biomarkers: a DEA analysis in type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

A chronic disease impacts a patient's daily life, with the burden of symptoms and managing the condition, and concerns of progression and disease complications. Such aspects are captured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROM), assessments of e.g. wellbeing. Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREM) assess patients' experiences of healthcare and address patient preferences. Biomarkers are useful for monitoring disease activity and treatment effect and determining risks of progression and complications, and they provide information on current and future health. Individuals may differ in which among these aspects they consider important. We aimed to develop a measure of quality of life using biomarkers, PROM and PREM, that would provide an unambiguous ranking of individuals, without presuming any specific set of importance weights. We anticipated it would be useful for studying needs and room for improvement, estimating the effects of interventions and comparing alternatives, and for developing healthcare with a broad focus on the individual. We wished to examine if efficiency analysis could be used for this purpose, in an application to individuals with type 1 diabetes.

RESULTS

We used PROM and PREM data linked to registry data on risk factors, in a large sample selected from the National Diabetes Registry in Sweden. Efficiency analysis appears useful for evaluating the situation of individuals with type 1 diabetes. Quality of life was estimated as efficiency, which differed by age. The contribution of different components to quality of life was heterogeneous, and differed by gender, age and duration of diabetes. Observed quality of life shortfall was mainly due to inefficiency, and to some extent due to the level of available inputs.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficiency analysis approach can use patient-reported outcomes measures, patient-reported experience measures and comorbidity risk factors to estimate quality of life with a broad focus on the individual, in individuals with type 1 diabetes. The approach enables ranking and comparisons using all these aspects in parallel, and allows each individual to express their own view of which aspects are important to them. The approach can be used for policy regarding interventions on inefficiency as well as healthcare resource allocation, although currently limited to type 1 diabetes.

Can the Routine Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Improve the Delivery of Person-Centered Diabetes Care? A Review of Recent Developments and a Case Study

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years, the recommendation for and use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine diabetes care has significantly increased. We review recent evidence and highlight key opportunities and challenges related to the active clinical use of PROMs to support person-centered diabetes care and focus areas for future research in the area.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent pragmatic studies support that integration of multi-dimensional PROMs for diabetes in clinical care as part of a care improvement strategy can be acceptable for and valued by people with diabetes (PWD) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) and may improve multiple aspects of quality of care, including screening, medical care monitoring and decision support, individualization of self-management support and goal-setting, and broader benefits related to active patient participation and person-centred diabetes care. We identify multiple intervention, individual, and care setting characteristics, which influence acceptability, feasibility, implementation, and effectiveness of PROMs in routine care. Recent clinical PROM studies highlight the value of mixed methods research and systematic involvement of PWD, clinicians, and other stakeholders in the design and implementation of questionnaires for patient input in routine diabetes care. We identified a new significant trend towards participatory development of multi-dimensional PROMs with the aim of IT-enabled integration into routine diabetes care to facilitate multiple components of person-centered diabetes care and better clinical, quality of life, and cost outcomes. While results from large-scale randomized controlled studies are still limited, a growing number of pragmatic implementation studies support that user-centric PROM interventions have the potential to facilitate significant improvements in care for PWD.

Health-related quality of life and glycaemic control among adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes - a nationwide cross-sectional study

Background

Health-related quality of life and glycaemic control are some of the central outcomes in clinical diabetes care and research. The purpose of this study was to describe the health-related quality of life and assess its association with glycaemic control in adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in a nationwide setting.

Methods

In this cross-sectional survey, people with type 1 (n = 2479) and type 2 diabetes (n = 2469) were selected at random without replacement from the Swedish National Diabetes Register. Eligibility criteria were being aged 18–80 years with at least one registered test of glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) the last 12 months. The generic 36-item Short Form version 2 (SF-36v2) was answered by 1373 (55.4%) people with type 1 diabetes and 1353 (54.8%) with type 2 diabetes.

Results

Correlation analyses showed weak correlations between scores on the SF-36v2 and glycaemic control for both diabetes types. After the participants were divided into three groups based on their levels of HbA_1c, multivariate regression analyses adjusted for demographics, other risk factors and diabetes complications showed that among participants with type 1 diabetes, the high-risk group (≥70 mmol/mol/8.6%) had statistically significantly lower means in five out of eight domains of the SF-36v2 and the mental component summary measure, as compared with the well-controlled group (< 52 mmol/mol/6.9%). Among the participants with type 2 diabetes, the high-risk group had the lowest statistically significantly means in seven domains and both summary measures.

Conclusions

Among people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, adults with high-risk HbA_1c levels have lower levels of health-related quality of life in most but not all domains of the SF-36v2. This finding was not explained by demographics, other risk factors, or diabetes complications. The weak individual-level correlations between HRQOL scores and levels of glycaemic control argues for the need to not focus exclusively on either HbA_1c levels or HRQOL scores but rather on both because both are important parts of a complex, life-long, challenging condition.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-019-1212-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient-reported outcome and experience measures for diabetes: development of scale models, differences between patient groups and relationships with cardiovascular and diabetes complication risk factors, in a combined registry and survey study in Sweden

PURPOSE

The Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) has developed a diabetes-specific questionnaire to collect information on individuals' management of their diabetes, collaboration with healthcare providers and the disease's impact on daily life. Our main objective was to develop measures of well-being, abilities to manage diabetes and judgements of diabetes care, and to detect and quantify differences using the NDR questionnaire.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The questionnaire was analysed with using responses from 3689 participants with type 1 and 2 diabetes, randomly sampled from the NDR population, combined with register data on patient characteristics and cardiovascular and diabetes complication risk factors.

METHODS

We used item response theory to develop scales for measuring well-being, abilities to manage diabetes and judgements of diabetes care (scores). Test-retest reliability on the scale level was analysed with intraclass correlation. Associations between scores and risk factor levels were investigated with subgroup analyses and correlations.

RESULTS

We obtained scales with satisfactory measurement properties, covering patient reported outcome measures such as general well-being and being free of worries, and patient reported experience measure, for example, access and continuity in diabetes care. All scales had acceptable test-retest reliability and could detect differences between diabetes types, age, gender and treatment subgroups. In several aspects, for example, freedom of worries, type 1 patients report lower than type 2, and younger patients lower than older. Associations were found between some scores and glycated haemoglobin, but none with systolic blood pressure or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Clinicians report positive experience of using scores, visually presented, in the patient dialogue.

CONCLUSIONS

The questionnaire measures and detects differences in patient well-being, abilities and judgements of diabetes care, and identifies areas for improvement. To further improve diabetes care, we conclude that patient-reported measures are important supplements to cardiovascular and diabetes complication risk factors, reflecting patient experiences of living with diabetes and diabetes care.