scholarly journals Mixed methods study to develop the content validity and the conceptual framework of the electronic patient-reported outcome measure for vascular conditions

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e034154
Author(s):  
Ahmed Aber ◽  
Patrick Phillips ◽  
Elizabeth Lumley ◽  
Stephen Radley ◽  
Steven M Thomas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
New Instrument ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Face ◽  
Personal Assessment ◽  
Assessment Questionnaire

ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to describe the stages undertaken to generate the items and conceptual framework of a new electronic personal assessment questionnaire for vascular conditions.DesignA mixed methods study: First a survey of vascular clinicians was completed to identify the most common conditions treated in vascular clinics and wards. Quantitative systematic reviews were done to identify validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for direct inclsuion in the new instrument. However, due to scarcity of validated PROMs, the items of the new instrument were mainly based on a large qualitative study of patients and systematic reviews of the qualitative evidence . This was followed by a quantitative clinicians’ consensus study and, finally, a qualitative face validity study with patients.ParticipantsVascular patients participated in the primary qualitative study and the face validity study. In the qualitative study, 55 patients were interviewed, and for the face validity, 19 patients gave feedback. Twelve clinicians completed the survey and 13 completed two cycles of the clinicians’ consensus study.ResultsThe items and scales in the electronic personal assessment questionnaire for vascular conditions (ePAQ-VAS) were generated based on the results of five systematic reviews evaluating existing PROMs for possible inclusion in ePAQ-VAS, five systematic reviews of qualitative evidence, a primary qualitative study involving 55 patients and clinicians’ input. One hundred and sixty-eight items were initially generated, of which 59 were eliminated by the expert panel due to repetition. The instrument was divided into one generic and three disease-specific sections (abdominal aortic aneurysm, carotid artery disease and lower limb vascular conditions). In each section, items were grouped together into putative scales. Fifty-five items were grouped across eight scales; the remaining items were kept as individual items, because of relevance to service users.ConclusionsThis multidimensional electronic questionnaire covers the most common vascular conditions. This is particularly important for patients presenting with mixed symptoms or multiple conditions. This tool captures symptomatology, health related quality of life (HRQoL) and other clinically relevant data, such as experience with services and comorbidities.

scholarly journals Personal Accounts of Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer Organized as Patient-Reported Data: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klay Lamprell ◽  
Diana Fajardo Pulido ◽  
Yvonne Tran ◽  
Bróna Nic Giolla Easpaig ◽  
Winston Liauw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Young Onset ◽  
Patient Pathway ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Reported Data ◽  
Patient Stories

BACKGROUND Young-onset colorectal cancer is a contemporary issue in need of substantial research input. The incidence of colorectal cancer in adults younger than 50 years is rising in contrast to the decreasing incidence of this cancer in older adults. People with young-onset colorectal cancer may be at that stage of life in which they are establishing their careers, building relationships with long-term partners, raising children, and assembling a financial base for the future. A qualitative study designed to facilitate triangulation with extant quantitative patient-reported data would contribute the first comprehensive resource for understanding how this distinct patient population experiences health services and the outcomes of care throughout the patient pathway. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to undertake a mixed-methods study of qualitative patient-reported data on young-onset colorectal cancer experiences and outcomes. METHODS This is a study of web-based unsolicited patient stories recounting experiences of health services and clinical outcomes related to young-onset colorectal cancer. Personal Recollections Organized as Data (PROD) is a novel methodology for understanding patients’ health experiences in order to improve care. PROD pivots qualitative data collection and analysis around the validated domains and dimensions measured in patient-reported outcome and patient-reported experience questionnaires. PROD involves 4 processes: (1) classifying attributes of the contributing patients, their disease states, their routes to diagnosis, and the clinical features of their treatment and posttreatment; (2) coding texts into the patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome domains and dimensions, defined a priori, according to phases of the patient pathway; (3) thematic analysis of content within and across each domain; and (4) quantitative text analysis of the narrative content. RESULTS Relevant patient stories have been identified, and permission has been obtained for use of the texts in primary research. The approval for this study was granted by the Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee in June 2020. The analytical framework was established in September 2020, and data collection commenced in October 2020. We will complete the analysis in March 2021 and we aim to publish the results in mid-2021. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this study will identify areas for improvement in the PROD methodology and inform the development of a large-scale study of young-onset colorectal cancer patient narratives. We believe that this will be the first qualitative study to identify and describe the patient pathway from symptom self-identification to help-seeking through to diagnosis, treatment, and to survivorship or palliation for people with young-onset colorectal cancer. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/25056

scholarly journals Personal Accounts of Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer Organized as Patient-Reported Data: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

10.2196/25056 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e25056
Author(s):  
Klay Lamprell ◽  
Diana Fajardo Pulido ◽  
Yvonne Tran ◽  
Bróna Nic Giolla Easpaig ◽  
Winston Liauw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Young Onset ◽  
Patient Pathway ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Reported Data ◽  
Patient Stories

Background Young-onset colorectal cancer is a contemporary issue in need of substantial research input. The incidence of colorectal cancer in adults younger than 50 years is rising in contrast to the decreasing incidence of this cancer in older adults. People with young-onset colorectal cancer may be at that stage of life in which they are establishing their careers, building relationships with long-term partners, raising children, and assembling a financial base for the future. A qualitative study designed to facilitate triangulation with extant quantitative patient-reported data would contribute the first comprehensive resource for understanding how this distinct patient population experiences health services and the outcomes of care throughout the patient pathway. Objective The aim of this study was to undertake a mixed-methods study of qualitative patient-reported data on young-onset colorectal cancer experiences and outcomes. Methods This is a study of web-based unsolicited patient stories recounting experiences of health services and clinical outcomes related to young-onset colorectal cancer. Personal Recollections Organized as Data (PROD) is a novel methodology for understanding patients’ health experiences in order to improve care. PROD pivots qualitative data collection and analysis around the validated domains and dimensions measured in patient-reported outcome and patient-reported experience questionnaires. PROD involves 4 processes: (1) classifying attributes of the contributing patients, their disease states, their routes to diagnosis, and the clinical features of their treatment and posttreatment; (2) coding texts into the patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome domains and dimensions, defined a priori, according to phases of the patient pathway; (3) thematic analysis of content within and across each domain; and (4) quantitative text analysis of the narrative content. Results Relevant patient stories have been identified, and permission has been obtained for use of the texts in primary research. The approval for this study was granted by the Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee in June 2020. The analytical framework was established in September 2020, and data collection commenced in October 2020. We will complete the analysis in March 2021 and we aim to publish the results in mid-2021. Conclusions The findings of this study will identify areas for improvement in the PROD methodology and inform the development of a large-scale study of young-onset colorectal cancer patient narratives. We believe that this will be the first qualitative study to identify and describe the patient pathway from symptom self-identification to help-seeking through to diagnosis, treatment, and to survivorship or palliation for people with young-onset colorectal cancer. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/25056

scholarly journals Validity and Reliability of the Thai Version of the Thyroid-Related Patient-Reported Outcome—A Thyroid-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patorn Piromchai ◽  
Supachat Chaiudomsom ◽  
Pattaramon Wijakkanalan ◽  
Torquil Watt
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Face ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Benign Thyroid

Abstract Introduction The Thyroid-Related Patient-Reported Outcome (ThyPRO) is a new thyroid-specific quality of life patient-reported outcome measure for benign thyroid disorders. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the face validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of the Thai version of the ThyPRO (ThyPROth). Methods The translation of the ThyPRO questionnaire was performed using double forward translation, reconciliation, single backward translation, and cognitive debriefing, followed by a panel review. Five thyroid patients evaluated the face validity. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated in 30 patients with thyroid diseases. Results The overall validity score was 3.75 (range 0–4). The Cronbach α coefficient ranged from 0.76 to 0.95, with a total coefficient of 0.97 (95% CI 0.962–0.959), indicating excellent internal consistency. The test-retest reliability coefficient ranged from 0.70 to 0.97. All values were 0.70 and above. The total reliability coefficient was 0.86 (95% CI 0.724–0.932), indicating excellent reliability. Conclusion The ThyPROth was found to be valid and to exhibit good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The questionnaire is ready for implementation in the assessment of health-related quality of life in Thai patients with benign thyroid diseases.

scholarly journals The ENDOPAIN 4D Questionnaire: A New Validated Tool for Assessing Pain in Endometriosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (15) ◽  
pp. 3216
Author(s):  
Anne Puchar ◽  
Pierre Panel ◽  
Anne Oppenheimer ◽  
Joseph Du Cheyron ◽  
Xavier Fritel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Dimensional Structure ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Urinary Tract Symptoms ◽  
New Instrument ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Good Internal Consistency ◽  
Pain Symptoms

Objectives: To study the measurement properties, the responsiveness and the minimal clinically important difference of the ENDOPAIN-4D: a new questionnaire for assessing pain in endometriosis. Methods: A prospective, observational, multicentre study was conducted including all women ≥18 years consulting for symptomatic proven endometriosis between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2018 and volunteering to participate. Each patient had to answer a new self-administered patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires (the ENDOPAIN-4D) at inclusion (T0) and 12 months after medical or surgical treatment (T1). Criteria defined by COSMIN were used to validate the questionnaire's measurement properties. The minimal clinically important difference was estimated by the anchor-based method. Results: The study included 199 women. The ENDOPAIN-4D score had a four dimensional structure with good internal consistency (measured by Cronbach α): I) pain-related disability (α = 0.79), II) painful bowel symptoms (α = 0.80), III) dyspareunia (α = 0.83), and IV) painful urinary tract symptoms (α = 0.77). They produced four subscores that can be summed to obtain a single score (α = 0.61). The ENDOPAIN-4D total score ranged from 0 to 94.00 (mean ± SD: 46.7 ± 22). The total score was significantly correlated with the PROs used in endometriosis. Sensitivity to change was good with large effect sizes (ES) (mean of the differences: 36.3 p = 1.8 10−7, ES 0.76). The minimal clinically important difference of the global score was determined to be 10.9. Conclusions: The ENDOPAIN-4D questionnaire is easy to use, valid, and effective in assessing patient reported pain symptoms in women treated for endometriosis. This new instrument can be used as the primary outcome for future clinical trials and as a tool for routine patient follow-up.

FRI0562 THE PERSPECTIVE OF YOUNG PEOPLE WITH INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS ON PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES: RESULTS OF A EUROPE-WIDE SURVEY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 883-883
Author(s):  
A. Alunno ◽  
E. Mosor ◽  
T. Stamm ◽  
P. Studenic
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Patient Reported

Background:Although patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in clinical practice and research, it is unclear if these instruments adequately cover the perspective of young people (18-35 years) with inflammatory arthritis (IA). We recently performed focus groups on PROMs with 53 young IA patients from 4 European countries, but the perspective of these patients has never been explored on a large scale.Objectives:To explore personal experience, opinions and beliefs of young people with IA across Europe concerning PROMs content, characteristics and ways of administration in order to inform EULAR points to consider (PtC) for including the perspective of young patients with IA into PROMs.Methods:Based on the results of our previous qualitative study, a task force including patients, rheumatologists and health professionals developed an online survey. The survey covered personal experience, preferences and opinions concerning PROMs. After being pilot tested and revised accordingly, the survey was distributed through the EULAR people with arthritis and rheumatism in Europe (PARE), Young PARE networks and the Emerging EULAR Network (EMEUNET).Results:547 people (88% females) from 29 countries aged 18-35 years with a diagnosis of juvenile idiopathic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, Still’s disease, psoriatic arthritis or spondyloarthritis completed the survey (Figure 1). Thirty-seven percent of respondents reported they never filled a PROM. A North-South and West-East Europe gradient was observed (30.4% vs 56.3% and 25.5% vs 58.8% respectively). Figure 2 outlines key findings of our survey. Among respondents having filled PROMs (n=313), two thirds perceived their access to PROM results useful for self-management of their health. Discomfort while filling PROMs was an issue for nearly half of the respondents, as questions were perceived as scaring or not relevant. This discomfort, the fear of judgement, or inadequate assessed time frames were major reasons for difficulties in translating the health experience into a rating scale. Still 75% use their own experience in the past as reference. Among several reasons, people scored differently from what they felt to emphasize how much better or worse they felt from previous assessment. Concerning preferences of numerical rating scales (NRS) or visual analogue scales (VAS) explored in all respondents regardless having ever filled in PROMs, those in favour of VAS mainly reasoned this by having more possibilities to select and those favouring NRS by better readability and interpretation. Maintaining a sitting position, preparing food, doing physical activity, intimacy and sleep problems were the items selected most frequently in the survey as in the qualitative study to be included in PROMs. The implementation of discussion on self-management, education/work and support possibilities at regular clinic visits was considered important by over 60% of responders. Overall, electronic capturing of PROMs was preferred over paper-based questionnaires (57% vs 13%).Conclusion:Our survey explored for the first time the personal experience and opinions of young people with IA concerning PROMs on a large scale and confirmed the results obtained in the qualitative study. This survey informed the EULAR PtC for including the perspective of young patients with IA into PROMs.References:[1] Mosor E et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10)Disclosure of Interests:Alessia Alunno: None declared, Erika Mosor: None declared, Tanja Stamm Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Sanofi Genzyme, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, Sanofi, Paul Studenic Grant/research support from: Abbvie

scholarly journals Generic Patient-Reported Outcomes and Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review Study Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuki Seidler ◽  
Erika Mosor ◽  
Margaret R Andrews ◽  
Carolina Watson ◽  
Nick Bott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an essential part of health outcome measurement and vital to patient-centricity and valued-based care. Several international consortia have developed core outcome sets and many of them include PROs. PROs are measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROs and PROMs can be generic or specific to certain diseases or conditions. While the characteristics of generic PROs and PROMs are well recognised as widely relevant and applicable across different domains, diseases and conditions, there is a lack of knowledge on the types of PROs measured by generic PROMs. We also do not know in which disease areas generic PROs and PROMs are commonly used. To date, there has been no systematic review solely focusing on generic PROMs, what they measure and their areas of application. Objectives: This systematic review will identify core PROs measured by generic PROMs used in adult populations and the areas in which they are applied. Methods: We will conduct a systematic review of reviews. The screening process and the reporting will comply with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) 2020 Statement. We will use four databases, Medline [PubMed], CINHAL [Ebsco], Cochrane [Cochrane Library], and PsycINFO [Ovid], and reports from international consortia. Inclusion criteria are systematic reviews, meta-analysis or patient-reported outcome sets developed by international consortia reporting on generic PROMs in adult populations. Articles primarily focusing on patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), children or adolescents, or those not written in English will be excluded. Risk of bias will be assessed by checking if the included articles comply with established guidelines for systematic reviews such as the PRISMA statement. We will extract generic PROMs and PROs measured by these PROMs, and the areas applied from the selected articles and reports. Extracted data and information will be quantitatively and qualitatively synthesised without statistical interference. The quality of the synthesised evidences will be assessed by clarifying the strengths, limitations and possible biases in our review.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document