Assessing the Content Validity of a New Patient-Reported Measure of Barriers to Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence for Electronic Administration in Routine HIV Care: Proposal for a Web-Based Delphi Study

The screening and management of sleep disturbances in people living with HIV: Delphi consensus

Sleep disturbances in people living with HIV (PLHIV) are frequent but their management remains insufficient. In the absence of specific recommendations, a DELPHI consensus research project was conducted in France to establish best practice. A multidisciplinary Steering Committee (STC) undertook a literature review and used it with clinical expertise to create statements that were voted on. Two profiles of healthcare professionals with significant experience in monitoring PLHIV were selected for the voting: physicians and nurses/psychologists. Votes were collected electronically, independently, and anonymously. The STC created 27 statements covering six areas: Screening of sleep disturbances, Investigation, First-line management, Referral to a specialist, Antiretroviral treatment (ARV), and Prevention. Two rounds of votes included 42 physicians and 32 nurses/psychologists. Consensus was reached for 24 out of 27 statements (89%) including: to assess quantity and quality of sleep among PLHIV at least annually, ideally using a common methodology within the medical department; to consider the temporary addition of a hypnotic treatment in cases of acute insomnia not improved by the rules of sleep hygiene, with full awareness of potential drug-drug interactions and risk of dependence; to correct ferritinaemia if <100 ng/mL before referral to a specialist when restless legs syndrome is suspected; to consider changing the time of ARV administration or an ARV switch within the same class when sleep disturbances are caused by an ARV. This DELPHI Consensus provides best practice for screening and managing sleep disturbances in PLHIV and optimising their quality of life.

Use of genotypic HIV DNA testing: a DELPHI-type consensus

OBJECTIVES

As many disparities in the clinical use of HIV DNA sequencing are observed, a DELPHI-type consensus was initiated in France to homogenize use, techniques and interpretation of results.

METHODS

Based on a literature review and clinical experience, a steering committee (SC) of eight virologists and one infectious disease specialist formulated statements. Statements were submitted to an independent and anonymous electronic vote of virologists and HIV clinicians in France, between October 2022 and December 2022.

RESULTS

The SC developed 20 statements grouped into six categories: clinical situations for the use of HIV DNA genotyping; techniques for performing HIV DNA genotyping; consideration of apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme (APOBEC) mutations; genotyping results reporting; recycling of antiretrovirals; and availability of HIV DNA genotyping tests and delays. Twenty-one virologists and 47 clinicians participated in two voting rounds and 18/20 (90%) assertions reached a 'strong' consensus. For example, that prior genotyping on HIV DNA is useful for clinical decision-making when considering switching to some long-acting regimens or to reduce the number of antiretroviral agents in virologically suppressed patients for whom RNA data are unavailable/not exploitable/not sufficiently informative. Two statements achieved no consensus: reporting any detected viral minority population for discussion in multidisciplinary meetings (virologists), and possible risk of virological failure when using a second-generation InSTI plus lamivudine or emtricitabine regimen in patients with undetectable viral load within ≥1 year and in the presence of a documented M184V mutation within the last 5 years (clinicians).

CONCLUSIONS

This DELPHI-type consensus will facilitate the strengthening and harmonization of good practice when performing HIV DNA sequencing.

Achieving consensus on priority items for paediatric palliative care outcome measurement: Results from a modified Delphi survey, engagement with a children's research involvement group and expert item generation

BACKGROUND

There is no validated outcome measure for use in children's palliative care outside sub-Saharan Africa. Stakeholders must be involved in the development of such measures to ensure face and content validity.

AIM

To gain expert stakeholder consensus on items for inclusion in a paediatric palliative care outcome measure to establish face and content validity.

DESIGN

This study was conducted in two phases following Rothrock and COSMIN guidance on patient-reported outcome measure development. Phase 1: Three-round modified Delphi survey to establish consensus on priority items. Phase 2: Item generation meeting with key stakeholders to develop initial measure versions. A young person's advisory group was also consulted on priority outcomes.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Delphi survey: Parents and professionals with experience of caring for a child with a life-limiting condition. Young person's advisory group: young people age 10-20 years. Item generation meeting: bereaved parents, academics and clinicians.

RESULTS

Phase 1: Delphi survey (n = 82). Agreement increased from Kendall's W = 0.17 to W = 0.61, indicating movement towards consensus. Agreement between professional and parent ranking was poor (Cohen's kappa 0.13). Professionals prioritised physical symptoms, whereas parents prioritised psychosocial and practical concerns. Advisory group: Children (n = 22) prioritised items related to living a 'normal life' in addition to items prioritised by adult participants. Phase 2: Five age/developmental stage appropriate child and proxy-reported versions of C-POS, containing 13 items, were drafted.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance and feasibility of involving key stakeholders in PROM item generation, as important differences were found in the priority outcomes identified by children, parents and professionals.

Content validation of a new measure of patient-reported barriers to antiretroviral therapy adherence, the I-Score: results from a Delphi study

Background

Over a third of people living with HIV (PLHIV) have suboptimal adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Measures of barriers to ART adherence often lack comprehensiveness. To help manage ART adherence barriers in HIV care, we are developing a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of these barriers (the I-Score).

Methods

We assessed the content validity of 100 items (distinct barriers) to retain only those most relevant to both PLHIV and HIV health/social service providers. A web-based Delphi was conducted in Canada and France, collecting data from December 2018 to October 2019. Items were evaluated on relevance (the combined rated importance and actionability for HIV care of items among both PLHIV and providers); comprehensibility (rated item clarity); comprehensiveness (examined against our conceptual framework); cross-cultural equivalence (based on comparisons by questionnaire language (English, French) and country of residence). Pearson’s chi-square tests were used for comparisons by language, country, gender, and stakeholder group (PLHIV, providers).

Results

Panelists included 40 PLHIV and 57 providers (66% response rate). Thirty-one items were retained based on consensus thresholds for relevance (minimum: 50% for PLHIV, 60% for providers) and showed good comprehensibility and comprehensiveness, when compared to our conceptual framework (representation of: 6/6 domains, 15/20 subdomains). No significant difference in relevance based on language or country was found among retained items, suggestive of cross-cultural equivalence. Among all 100 items, only 6 significant differences on relevance were observed for gender. For 62 items, the relevance ratings of PLHIV and providers differed significantly, with providers showing greater endorsement of all items but one.

Discussion

The Delphi led to a much-needed item reduction. Remaining items highlight the panel’s multidimensional priorities for the PROM on ART adherence barriers, with few, if any, differences by language, country, and gender. While the analyses may lack generalizability and power, the sample size is considered adequate for a PROM validation study.

Conclusion

Retained items showed good content validity. The different patterns of item endorsement observed underscore the utility of engaging multiple stakeholder groups in PROM development for use in clinical practice. The greater endorsement of items by providers versus patients merits further investigation, including the implications of such differentials for measure development.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00435-0.

Implementation of an electronic patient-reported measure of barriers to antiretroviral therapy adherence with the Opal patient portal: Protocol for a mixed method type 3 hybrid pilot study at a large Montreal HIV clinic

BACKGROUND

Adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) remains problematic. Regular monitoring of its barriers is clinically recommended, however, patient-provider communication around adherence is often inadequate. Our team thus decided to develop a new electronically administered patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of barriers to ART adherence (the I-Score) to systematically capture this data for physician consideration in routine HIV care. To prepare for a controlled definitive trial to test the I-Score intervention, a pilot study was designed. Its primary objectives are to evaluate patient and physician perceptions of the I-Score intervention and its implementation strategy.

METHODS

This one-arm, 6-month study will adopt a mixed method type 3 implementation-effectiveness hybrid design and be conducted at the Chronic Viral Illness Service of the McGill University Health Centre (Montreal, Canada). Four HIV physicians and 32 of their HIV patients with known or suspected adherence problems will participate. The intervention will involve having patients complete the I-Score through a smartphone application (Opal), before meeting with their physician. Both patients and physicians will have access to the I-Score results, for consideration during the clinic visits at Times 1, 2 (3 months), and 3 (6 months). The implementation strategy will focus on stakeholder involvement, education, and training; promoting the intervention's adaptability; and hiring an Application Manager to facilitate implementation. Implementation, patient, and service outcomes will be collected (Times 1-2-3). The primary outcome is the intervention's acceptability to patients and physicians. Qualitative data obtained, in part, through physician focus groups (Times 2-3) and patient interviews (Times 2-3) will help evaluate the implementation strategy and inform any methodological adaptations.

DISCUSSION

This study will help plan a definitive trial to test the efficacy of the I-Score intervention. It will generate needed data on electronic PROM interventions in routine HIV care that will help improve understanding of conditions for their successful implementation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04702412; https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Challenges of Patient Engagement in an HIV Clinical Research Program: A Qualitative Analysis of Stakeholder Accounts

Patient engagement (PE) promotes collaboration between stakeholders (researchers, patients, clinicians, etc). It often faces challenges due to tensions between its ethical/political and scientific underpinnings. This article explores how stakeholders applied the guiding principles of a PE project (“co-build,” “support and mutual respect,” and “inclusiveness”) for an HIV clinical research program initiated in January 2016. Three researchers/clinicians, a PE agent, and 2 patients held 3 meetings (June-October 2018) to discuss challenges faced and how these impacted their approach to PE. Regular stakeholder discussions about PE in clinical research could be documented and help guide PE to better meet stakeholder needs.