Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Life Interference Questionnaire for Growth Hormone Deficiency (LIQ-GHD) to Assess Growth Hormone Injection Burden in Children and Adults.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Child
Child, Preschool
Cost of Illness
Cross-Sectional Studies
Factor Analysis, Statistical
Female
Human Growth Hormone
/ administration & dosage
Humans
Injections
/ psychology
Interviews as Topic
Male
Middle Aged
Psychometrics
Reproducibility of Results
Surveys and Questionnaires
/ standards
Young Adult
Journal
The patient
ISSN: 1178-1661
Titre abrégé: Patient
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101309314
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
21
1
2020
medline:
28
5
2021
entrez:
21
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Current recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) replacement therapy involves long-term daily subcutaneous injections to treat growth hormone deficiency (GHD) in children and adults. Daily r-hGH injections can be burdensome, often resulting in poor treatment compliance. Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) can capture the burden of these injections from the patient (and caregiver) perspective and may demonstrate the benefit of a less-frequent r-hGH injection regimen, which may ultimately improve treatment compliance and long-term outcomes. To address this knowledge gap, qualitative research was conducted to inform the development of a new Life Interference Questionnaire for Growth Hormone Deficiency (LIQ-GHD), designed to measure the experiences of patients taking r-hGH GHD injections. A second objective was to evaluate the hypothesized factor structure and preliminary performance of the LIQ-GHD in a cross-sectional observational study. An empirical literature review and expert advice meetings were conducted to inform development of the draft LIQ-GHD (pediatric and adult versions). In-person concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with GHD patients (and patient dyads including caregivers) to explore and confirm concept coverage and evaluate respondents' ability to understand the questionnaire. The draft LIQ-GHD was then tested in a cross-sectional field study involving pediatric and adult patients receiving daily r-hGH injections for GHD. The factor structure, reliability, and validity were analyzed for the overall sample and for pediatric, adolescent, and adult subgroups. Results from the literature review and input from six experts were used to develop and refine the LIQ-GHD, with content covering pen ease of use; regimen convenience; life interference due to regimen; benefit/satisfaction/willingness to continue treatment; regimen choice/preference; intent to comply with regimen; injection-related signs/symptoms; and reasons for missed injections. Twenty-one patient interviews confirmed comprehensive concept coverage and patient/caregiver comprehension of the LIQ-GHD. A total of 224 patients (n = 70 children/caregiver dyads, n = 79 adolescents/caregiver dyads, n = 75 adults) participated in the field study. While most items showed floor effects, confirmatory factor analysis fit statistics were good for the overall sample (root mean square error of approximation = 0.07, comparative fit index = 0.98) and for the full pediatric sample after dropping co-dependent questions from the model. Cronbach's alpha (α) ranged from 0.746 to 0.905 and intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.761 to 0.918 for the overall sample on LIQ-GHD domains. Scores correlated as predicted with an existing criterion measure in the overall sample and LIQ-GHD domain scores distinguished known groups as expected. The LIQ-GHD is a new COA for the measurement of r-hGH injection treatment burden. This research provides evidence supporting its content validity, hypothesized factor structure, score reliability, and construct validity in pediatric and adult populations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Current recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) replacement therapy involves long-term daily subcutaneous injections to treat growth hormone deficiency (GHD) in children and adults. Daily r-hGH injections can be burdensome, often resulting in poor treatment compliance. Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) can capture the burden of these injections from the patient (and caregiver) perspective and may demonstrate the benefit of a less-frequent r-hGH injection regimen, which may ultimately improve treatment compliance and long-term outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To address this knowledge gap, qualitative research was conducted to inform the development of a new Life Interference Questionnaire for Growth Hormone Deficiency (LIQ-GHD), designed to measure the experiences of patients taking r-hGH GHD injections. A second objective was to evaluate the hypothesized factor structure and preliminary performance of the LIQ-GHD in a cross-sectional observational study.
METHODS
An empirical literature review and expert advice meetings were conducted to inform development of the draft LIQ-GHD (pediatric and adult versions). In-person concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with GHD patients (and patient dyads including caregivers) to explore and confirm concept coverage and evaluate respondents' ability to understand the questionnaire. The draft LIQ-GHD was then tested in a cross-sectional field study involving pediatric and adult patients receiving daily r-hGH injections for GHD. The factor structure, reliability, and validity were analyzed for the overall sample and for pediatric, adolescent, and adult subgroups.
RESULTS
Results from the literature review and input from six experts were used to develop and refine the LIQ-GHD, with content covering pen ease of use; regimen convenience; life interference due to regimen; benefit/satisfaction/willingness to continue treatment; regimen choice/preference; intent to comply with regimen; injection-related signs/symptoms; and reasons for missed injections. Twenty-one patient interviews confirmed comprehensive concept coverage and patient/caregiver comprehension of the LIQ-GHD. A total of 224 patients (n = 70 children/caregiver dyads, n = 79 adolescents/caregiver dyads, n = 75 adults) participated in the field study. While most items showed floor effects, confirmatory factor analysis fit statistics were good for the overall sample (root mean square error of approximation = 0.07, comparative fit index = 0.98) and for the full pediatric sample after dropping co-dependent questions from the model. Cronbach's alpha (α) ranged from 0.746 to 0.905 and intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.761 to 0.918 for the overall sample on LIQ-GHD domains. Scores correlated as predicted with an existing criterion measure in the overall sample and LIQ-GHD domain scores distinguished known groups as expected.
CONCLUSIONS
The LIQ-GHD is a new COA for the measurement of r-hGH injection treatment burden. This research provides evidence supporting its content validity, hypothesized factor structure, score reliability, and construct validity in pediatric and adult populations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31956960
doi: 10.1007/s40271-019-00405-7
pii: 10.1007/s40271-019-00405-7
pmc: PMC7210233
doi:
Substances chimiques
Human Growth Hormone
12629-01-5
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
289-306Références
PLoS One. 2011 Jan 31;6(1):e16223
pubmed: 21305004
BMC Geriatr. 2009 Jul 13;9:27
pubmed: 19594913
Arch Dis Child. 1977 Mar;52(3):197-208
pubmed: 848998
Value Health. 2005 Nov-Dec;8 Suppl 1:S25-34
pubmed: 16336486
Eur J Endocrinol. 2005 Feb;152(2):165-70
pubmed: 15745921
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Oct 09;10:126
pubmed: 23046797
Clin Ther. 1996 Sep-Oct;18(5):979-92
pubmed: 8930436
Eur J Health Econ. 2011 Jun;12(3):219-30
pubmed: 20224930
Clin Interv Aging. 2006;1(4):415-23
pubmed: 18046918
Psychol Bull. 1959 Mar;56(2):81-105
pubmed: 13634291
Endocr Connect. 2018 Aug;7(8):914-923
pubmed: 29976785
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2017 Dec 11;8:346
pubmed: 29312142
J Pediatr. 1994 Jul;125(1):29-35
pubmed: 8021781
Chin Med J (Engl). 1992 May;105(5):401-5
pubmed: 1499371
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2000 Nov;85(11):3990-3
pubmed: 11095419
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Sep;83(9):2107-2117
pubmed: 28429533
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2009 Sep-Oct;49(5):e132-46; quiz e147-9
pubmed: 19748861
JAMA. 1995 Jan 4;273(1):59-65
pubmed: 7996652
Horm Res Paediatr. 2014;81(5):331-5
pubmed: 24714410
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Jan 13;9:2
pubmed: 21232106
Qual Life Res. 2010 Oct;19(8):1087-96
pubmed: 20512662
Endocr Pract. 2008 Mar;14(2):143-54
pubmed: 18308651
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(5):363-70
pubmed: 18429654
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
pubmed: 18839484
Br Med J. 1977 Aug 13;2(6084):427-30
pubmed: 890325
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Nov;63(9):2354-66
pubmed: 16887248
Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(2):251-62
pubmed: 26549576
N Engl J Med. 1999 Oct 14;341(16):1206-16
pubmed: 10519899
Horm Res Paediatr. 2013;79(4):189-96
pubmed: 23635797
Diabetes Ther. 2017 Dec;8(6):1365-1378
pubmed: 29101681
Endocr Pract. 2009 Sep-Oct;15 Suppl 2:1-29
pubmed: 20228036
Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2015 Jan 16;8:49-56
pubmed: 25653546
Growth Horm IGF Res. 2009 Feb;19(1):1-11
pubmed: 18824380
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 May 07;11:76
pubmed: 23648112
Diabetes Care. 2005 Sep;28(9):2243-5
pubmed: 16123499
Diabetes Ther. 2015 Mar;6(1):75-84
pubmed: 25586555
Patient. 2017 Oct;10(5):653-666
pubmed: 28386679
Value Health. 2013 Jun;16(4):461-79
pubmed: 23796280