Validity of the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) Questionnaire.
Journal
The patient
ISSN: 1178-1661
Titre abrégé: Patient
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101309314
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2019
02 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
28
10
2018
medline:
14
5
2019
entrez:
28
10
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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). 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. The study is registered in The Netherlands National Trial Register (Trial Code 5860).
Sections du résumé
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).
Identifiants
pubmed: 30367435
doi: 10.1007/s40271-018-0340-6
pii: 10.1007/s40271-018-0340-6
pmc: PMC6335379
doi:
Substances chimiques
Prescription Drugs
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
149-162Subventions
Organisme : ZonMw
ID : 15200095001
Pays : International
Investigateurs
Paul Bresser
(P)
Ilona Coenen
(I)
Nynke G Dijkstra
(NG)
Brigitte A A van Dooren
(BAA)
Miranda J J Geelhoed
(MJJ)
Marielle Gelens
(M)
Kirsten de Haas
(K)
René E Jonkers
(RE)
Bart Koopman
(B)
Henk Kramer
(H)
Mirjam J G van Manen
(MJG)
Jelle R Miedema
(JR)
Karen C C Moor
(KCC)
Rémy L M Mostard
(RLM)
Esther J Nossent
(EJ)
Marieke J Overbeek
(MJ)
Ellen Peeters
(E)
Rein H N A J van Rijswijk
(RHNAJ)
Helen Ryan
(H)
Nelleke C Tak
(NC)
Anneke van Veen
(A)
Lucyl Verhoeven
(L)
Michiel G J de Vries
(MGJ)
Monique Wapenaar
(M)
Ingrid M H Wegman
(IMH)
Jack Wetzels
(J)
Références
Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199-208
pubmed: 10109801
Med Care Rev. 1993 Summer;50(2):219-48
pubmed: 10127084
Patient Educ Couns. 2000 Jan;39(1):17-25
pubmed: 11013544
Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9):794-811
pubmed: 12218770
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Jul;22(1):85-93
pubmed: 12858311
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004 Feb 26;2:12
pubmed: 14987333
Clin J Pain. 2005 Jul-Aug;21(4):302-10
pubmed: 15951647
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Mar;194(3):722-8
pubmed: 16522404
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jan;60(1):34-42
pubmed: 17161752
Value Health. 2008 Sep-Oct;11(5):913-26
pubmed: 18494753
JAMA. 2008 Jul 23;300(4):436-8
pubmed: 18647988
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008 Feb;4(1):269-86
pubmed: 18728716
Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):539-49
pubmed: 20169472
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010 Jul;26(3):334-40
pubmed: 20584364
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb 15;183(4):431-40
pubmed: 20935110
J Med Econ. 2011;14(5):594-608
pubmed: 21732903
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011 Sep 08;6:60
pubmed: 21902819
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013 Jan;29(1):79-83
pubmed: 23217279
BMJ. 2013 Jan 28;346:f167
pubmed: 23358487
Health Expect. 2015 Oct;18(5):942-55
pubmed: 23634973
Breast. 2013 Oct;22(5):661-6
pubmed: 23770134
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Oct 08;11:167
pubmed: 24099272
N Engl J Med. 2014 May 29;370(22):2071-82
pubmed: 24836310
N Engl J Med. 2014 May 29;370(22):2083-92
pubmed: 24836312
Curr Med Res Opin. 2014 Nov;30(11):2329-41
pubmed: 25105306
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014 Dec;14(6):785-94
pubmed: 25135194
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2014 Sep;29 Suppl 4:iv131-41
pubmed: 25165180
Patient. 2015 Oct;8(5):385-95
pubmed: 25404203
Health Policy. 2015 Feb;119(2):180-5
pubmed: 25467790
Health Expect. 2015 Dec;18(6):3336-48
pubmed: 25484002
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015 Jul 09;9:971-81
pubmed: 26185426
Lancet Respir Med. 2016 Jan;4(1):8-10
pubmed: 26762661
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2016 Apr 08;12:563-74
pubmed: 27114711
Value Health. 2014 Nov;17(7):A583-4
pubmed: 27201976
Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2016 Sep;22(5):434-41
pubmed: 27333428
Patient. 2017 Oct;10(5):629-642
pubmed: 28357591
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2018 Apr 1;33(4):635-645
pubmed: 29106598
Qual Life Res. 1995 Aug;4(4):293-307
pubmed: 7550178
Med Care. 1997 Nov;35(11):1095-108
pubmed: 9366889