Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure to assess activities and participation in people with systemic sclerosis: the Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional scale.
Journal
The British journal of dermatology
ISSN: 1365-2133
Titre abrégé: Br J Dermatol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0004041
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
accepted:
02
02
2020
pubmed:
6
2
2020
medline:
15
5
2021
entrez:
5
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) aimed at assessing people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) have rarely involved the target population in the item- and domain-generation stage of the instrument construction. To develop a new PROM assessing activities and participation in people with SSc. A provisional International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based 65-item questionnaire previously developed from interviews of people with SSc was sent by email to all patients followed in the internal medicine department of Cochin hospital (n = 184) and enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort. Items were reduced according to their metric properties. Dimensional structure of the questionnaire was assessed by principal component analysis, convergent and divergent validities by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, internal consistency by Cronbach's α, and reliability by a test-retest method using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis. Overall, 113 of 184 patients (61·4%) completed the provisional questionnaire. The item-reduction process resulted in a 17-item questionnaire, the Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional scale (CSF-17). Principal component analysis extracted two dimensions: 10 items related to mobility (CSF-17 section A) and seven items related to general tasks (CSF-17 section B). We observed convergent validity of the CSF-17 total score with global activity limitation, pain, depression and aesthetic burden, and divergent validity with anxiety. Cronbach's α was 0·94 for section A and 0·95 for section B. ICC (n = 25 patients) was 0·92 for the CSF-17 total score. Bland-Altman analysis did not reveal a systematic trend for the test-retest. The CSF-17 is a new PROM assessing activities and participation specifically in people with SSc. Its content and construct validities are very high. What is already known about this topic? In the earliest stages of construction patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) for people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) rarely involve the target population. Instruments able to capture the specific needs of people with SSc in terms of activities and participation are lacking. What does this study add? The Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional Scale (CSF-17) is a new PROM assessing global activities and participation specifically in people with SSc. Patients' perspectives were prioritized at all stages of construction. What are the clinical implications of this work? The CSF-17 could be used in clinical practice and research to assess the efficacy of complex multidisciplinary interventions targeting activity limitations and participation restriction in people with SSc. Linked Comment: Clark and Denton. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:610.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) aimed at assessing people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) have rarely involved the target population in the item- and domain-generation stage of the instrument construction.
OBJECTIVES
To develop a new PROM assessing activities and participation in people with SSc.
METHODS
A provisional International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based 65-item questionnaire previously developed from interviews of people with SSc was sent by email to all patients followed in the internal medicine department of Cochin hospital (n = 184) and enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort. Items were reduced according to their metric properties. Dimensional structure of the questionnaire was assessed by principal component analysis, convergent and divergent validities by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, internal consistency by Cronbach's α, and reliability by a test-retest method using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis.
RESULTS
Overall, 113 of 184 patients (61·4%) completed the provisional questionnaire. The item-reduction process resulted in a 17-item questionnaire, the Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional scale (CSF-17). Principal component analysis extracted two dimensions: 10 items related to mobility (CSF-17 section A) and seven items related to general tasks (CSF-17 section B). We observed convergent validity of the CSF-17 total score with global activity limitation, pain, depression and aesthetic burden, and divergent validity with anxiety. Cronbach's α was 0·94 for section A and 0·95 for section B. ICC (n = 25 patients) was 0·92 for the CSF-17 total score. Bland-Altman analysis did not reveal a systematic trend for the test-retest.
CONCLUSIONS
The CSF-17 is a new PROM assessing activities and participation specifically in people with SSc. Its content and construct validities are very high. What is already known about this topic? In the earliest stages of construction patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) for people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) rarely involve the target population. Instruments able to capture the specific needs of people with SSc in terms of activities and participation are lacking. What does this study add? The Cochin 17-item Scleroderma Functional Scale (CSF-17) is a new PROM assessing global activities and participation specifically in people with SSc. Patients' perspectives were prioritized at all stages of construction. What are the clinical implications of this work? The CSF-17 could be used in clinical practice and research to assess the efficacy of complex multidisciplinary interventions targeting activity limitations and participation restriction in people with SSc. Linked Comment: Clark and Denton. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:610.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
710-718Subventions
Organisme : French Ministry of Health
ID : AOR‐10050
Pays : International
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2020 British Association of Dermatologists.
Références
Dumoitier N, Lofek S, Mouthon L. Pathophysiology of systemic sclerosis: state of the art in 2014. Presse Med 2014; 43:e267-78.
Tamby MC, Chanseaud Y, Guillevin L, Mouthon L. New insights into the pathogenesis of systemic sclerosis. Autoimmun Rev 2003; 2:152-7.
Clements PJ. Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma) and related disorders: clinical aspects. Baillière's Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2000; 14:1-16.
Steen VD, Medsger TA Jr. The value of the Health Assessment Questionnaire and special patient-generated scales to demonstrate change in systemic sclerosis patients over time. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40:1984-91.
Poole JL, Steen VD. The use of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) to determine physical disability in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Care Res 1991; 4:27-31.
Bousquet J, Knani J, Dhivert H et al. Quality of life in asthma. I. Internal consistency and validity of the SF-36 questionnaire. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994; 149:371-5.
Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 1992; 305:160-4.
Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; 34:220-33.
Daste C, Rannou F, Mouthon L et al. Patient acceptable symptom state and minimal clinically important difference for patient-reported outcomes in systemic sclerosis: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing personalized physical therapy to usual care. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2019; 48:694-700.
Rannou F, Poiraudeau S, Bérezné A et al. Assessing disability and quality of life in systemic sclerosis: construct validities of the Cochin Hand Function Scale, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Systemic Sclerosis HAQ, and Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57:94-102.
Nguyen C, Bérezné A, Mestre-Stanislas C et al. Changes over time and responsiveness of the Cochin Hand Function Scale and Mouth Handicap in Systemic Sclerosis scale in patients with systemic sclerosis: a prospective observational study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2016; 95:e189-e97.
Mouthon L, Rannou F, Bérezné A et al. Development and validation of a scale for mouth handicap in systemic sclerosis: the Mouth Handicap in Systemic Sclerosis scale. Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66:1651-5.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4:79.
Speight J, Barendse SM. FDA guidance on patient reported outcomes. BMJ 2010; 340:c2921.
Prinsen CAC, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res 2018; 27:1147-57.
Pauling JD, Frech TM, Domsic RT, Hudson M. Patient participation in patient-reported outcome instrument development in systemic sclerosis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2017; 35 (Suppl. 106):184-92.
Silman A, Akesson A, Newman J et al. Assessment of functional ability in patients with scleroderma: a proposed new disability assessment instrument. J Rheumatol 1998; 25:79-83.
Kallen MA, Mayes MD, Kriseman YL et al. The symptom burden index: development and initial findings from use with patients with systemic sclerosis. J Rheumatol 2010; 37:1692-8.
Suarez-Almazor ME, Kallen MA, Roundtree AK, Mayes M. Disease and symptom burden in systemic sclerosis: a patient perspective. J Rheumatol 2007; 34:1718-26.
Ruof J, Brühlmann P, Michel BA, Stucki G. Development and validation of a self-administered systemic sclerosis questionnaire (SySQ). Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38:535-42.
Ostojić P, Damjanov N. The scleroderma Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ). A new self-assessment questionnaire for evaluation of disease status in patients with systemic sclerosis. Z Rheumatol 2006; 65:168-75.
Khanna D, Furst DE, Wong WK et al. Reliability, validity, and minimally important differences of the SF-6D in systemic sclerosis. Qual Life Res 2007; 16:1083-92.
Khanna D, Hays RD, Maranian P et al. Reliability and validity of the University of California, Los Angeles Scleroderma Clinical Trial Consortium Gastrointestinal Tract Instrument. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 61:1257-63.
Papelard A, Daste C, Alami S et al. Construction of an ICF core set and ICF-based questionnaire assessing activities and participation in patients with systemic sclerosis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2019; 58:2260-72.
Kwakkenbos L, Jewett LR, Baron M et al. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort: protocol for a cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) design to support trials of psychosocial and rehabilitation interventions in a rare disease context. BMJ Open 2013; 3:pii:e003563.
Cieza A, Geyh S, Chatterji S et al. ICF linking rules: an update based on lessons learned. J Rehabil Med 2005; 37:212-18.
Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res 2004; 6:e34.
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: www.r-project.org/ (last accessed 18 February 2020).
Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A et al. Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2014; 12:176.
Nguyen C, Mouthon L, Mestre-Stanislas C et al. Sensitivity to change in systemic sclerosis of the McMaster-Toronto Arthritis Patient Preference Disability Questionnaire (MACTAR): shift in patient priorities over time. J Rheumatol 2010; 37:359-64.
Mouthon L, Rannou F, Bérezné A et al. Patient preference disability questionnaire in systemic sclerosis: a cross-sectional survey. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59:968-73.
Nguyen C, Ranque B, Baubet T et al. Clinical, functional and health-related quality of life correlates of clinically significant symptoms of anxiety and depression in patients with systemic sclerosis: a cross-sectional survey. PLOS ONE 2014; 9:e90484.
Tubach F, Ravaud P, Beaton D et al. Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. J Rheumatol 2007; 34:1188-93.
Tubach F, Ravaud P, Martin-Mola E et al. Minimum clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state in pain and function in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic back pain, hand osteoarthritis, and hip and knee osteoarthritis: results from a prospective multinational study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2012; 64:1699-707.
Falissard B. Analysis of Questionnaire Data with R. Chapter 7: Principles for the validation of a composite score analysis of questionnaire data with R. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2011.
Biemer PP, Lyberg LE. Introduction to Survey Quality. 3.6: Reducing nonresponse bias. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003.
Cramer D, Howitt D. The SAGE Dictionary of Statistics: A Practical Resource for Students in the Social Sciences. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2004.
Falissard B. Mesurer la Subjectivité en Santé: Perspective Méthodologique et Statistique. 3: Construire un instrument de mesure subjective. Issy les Moulineaux: Elsevier Masson, 2008.
Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Evaluation 2005; 10:1-9.
Cattell RB. The scree test for the number of factors. Multivar Behav Res 1966; 1:245-76.
Revelle WR. psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological research 2017. Available at: www.scholars.northwestern.edu/en/publications/psych-procedures-for-personality-and-psychological-research (last accessed 20 February 2020).
Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Quality of life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials (Spilker B, ed.), 2nd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Cronbach's alpha. BMJ 1997; 314:572.
Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instrument in psychology. Psychol Assess 1994; 6:284-90.
Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L et al. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56:730-5.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1:307-10.
Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Jewett LR, Malcarne VL, Kwakkenbos L et al. Development and validation of the Body Concealment Scale for Scleroderma. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2016; 68:1158-65.
Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56:395-407.
Rouquette A, Falissard B. Sample size requirements for the internal validation of psychiatric scales. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2011; 20:235-49.
Tingling P, Parent M, Wade MR. Extending the capabilities of Internet-based research: lessons from the field. Internet Res 2003; 13:223-35.
Marks L, Power E. Using technology to address recruitment issues in the clinical trial process. Trends Biotechnol 2002; 20:105-9.