Development of the neurotrophic keratopathy questionnaire: qualitative research.
Content validity
Instrument development
Interviews
Patient-reported outcome
Journal
Journal of patient-reported outcomes
ISSN: 2509-8020
Titre abrégé: J Patient Rep Outcomes
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101722688
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 May 2020
04 May 2020
Historique:
received:
09
04
2019
accepted:
27
03
2020
entrez:
6
5
2020
pubmed:
6
5
2020
medline:
6
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Neurotrophic keratopathy/keratitis (NK) is a rare disease of the cornea that can lead to anatomical loss of the eye. Little is known about the NK experience from the patients' perspective. The objectives of this study were to examine the symptomatic experience and impacts of NK on patients and assess the overall comprehension, relevance, and content validity of a new questionnaire. This was a cross-sectional, qualitative study conducted with NK patients with varying levels of disease severity, recruited from one clinical site. One-on-one interviews using concept elicitation and cognitive interviewing techniques were conducted. Fourteen NK patients participated; 64.3% were female (n = 9), mean age was 65.7 ± 13.3, and 14.3% (n = 2), 21.4% (n = 3), and 64.3% (n = 9) were classified as Mackie stage I, stage II, or stage III, respectively. Participants reported 24 concepts, including: redness (n = 12, 86%), sensitivity to light (n = 11, 79%), general discomfort (n = 9, 64%), dry eye (n = 9, 64%), reduced visual acuity (n = 9, 64%), blurred vision (n = 8, 57%), and eye fatigue (n = 8, 57%). No new concepts were reported after the 13th interview. The most frequently reported impacts included frustration (n = 10, 71%), driving impairment (n = 8, 57%), reading impairment (n = 7, 50%), difficulty watching television (n = 7, 50%), and concern with potentially losing their eyesight due to NK (n = 6, 43%). Participants provided positive feedback on the draft NK Questionnaire (NKQ) and felt that it was comprehensive and relevant to their experience with NK. Additionally, the recall period, instructions, item concepts, and response options were well-understood by participants. Minor revisions were made to the tool for consistency (i.e., the timeframe "in the past 7 days" was added to items 12-14); item 14 was modified to include "how often"; examples were added to item 9. The results of the concept elicitation portion of the qualitative study support the content validity of the draft NKQ. The clinically significant concepts identified in the literature and raised during concept elicitation are included as items in the questionnaire. Further assessment of the psychometric properties should be conducted in support of this new tool to measure the effect of new treatments on symptoms and impacts associated with NK.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Neurotrophic keratopathy/keratitis (NK) is a rare disease of the cornea that can lead to anatomical loss of the eye. Little is known about the NK experience from the patients' perspective. The objectives of this study were to examine the symptomatic experience and impacts of NK on patients and assess the overall comprehension, relevance, and content validity of a new questionnaire.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a cross-sectional, qualitative study conducted with NK patients with varying levels of disease severity, recruited from one clinical site. One-on-one interviews using concept elicitation and cognitive interviewing techniques were conducted.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Fourteen NK patients participated; 64.3% were female (n = 9), mean age was 65.7 ± 13.3, and 14.3% (n = 2), 21.4% (n = 3), and 64.3% (n = 9) were classified as Mackie stage I, stage II, or stage III, respectively. Participants reported 24 concepts, including: redness (n = 12, 86%), sensitivity to light (n = 11, 79%), general discomfort (n = 9, 64%), dry eye (n = 9, 64%), reduced visual acuity (n = 9, 64%), blurred vision (n = 8, 57%), and eye fatigue (n = 8, 57%). No new concepts were reported after the 13th interview. The most frequently reported impacts included frustration (n = 10, 71%), driving impairment (n = 8, 57%), reading impairment (n = 7, 50%), difficulty watching television (n = 7, 50%), and concern with potentially losing their eyesight due to NK (n = 6, 43%). Participants provided positive feedback on the draft NK Questionnaire (NKQ) and felt that it was comprehensive and relevant to their experience with NK. Additionally, the recall period, instructions, item concepts, and response options were well-understood by participants. Minor revisions were made to the tool for consistency (i.e., the timeframe "in the past 7 days" was added to items 12-14); item 14 was modified to include "how often"; examples were added to item 9.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the concept elicitation portion of the qualitative study support the content validity of the draft NKQ. The clinically significant concepts identified in the literature and raised during concept elicitation are included as items in the questionnaire. Further assessment of the psychometric properties should be conducted in support of this new tool to measure the effect of new treatments on symptoms and impacts associated with NK.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32367451
doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00192-y
pii: 10.1186/s41687-020-00192-y
pmc: PMC7198680
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
30Subventions
Organisme : Dompé farmaceutici S.p.A.
ID : Not applicable
Références
Arch Ophthalmol. 1977 Dec;95(12):2193-6
pubmed: 588113
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1993 May;51(5):480-94
pubmed: 8478755
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(5):363-70
pubmed: 18429654
Ocul Surf. 2007 Jan;5(1):50-7
pubmed: 17252166
Value Health. 2017 Jul - Aug;20(7):838-855
pubmed: 28712612
Eye (Lond). 2003 Nov;17(8):989-95
pubmed: 14631406
Clin Ophthalmol. 2014 May 02;8:837-42
pubmed: 24833891
Prog Retin Eye Res. 2018 Sep;66:107-131
pubmed: 29698813
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002 Apr;43(4):927-35
pubmed: 11923230
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Oct 11;4:79
pubmed: 17034633
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:805876
pubmed: 26451380
JAMA. 2012 Apr 18;307(15):1583-4
pubmed: 22511682
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011 May 18;52(6):3354-9
pubmed: 21282568
Clin Ophthalmol. 2014 Mar 19;8:571-9
pubmed: 24672223
Qual Life Res. 2012 Oct;21(8):1305-14
pubmed: 22048932
Am J Ophthalmol. 2000 Dec;130(6):793-802
pubmed: 11124300
Ophthalmologica. 2014;231(4):191-7
pubmed: 24107451
Med Care. 2015 Jan;53(1):9-17
pubmed: 25494232
Value Health. 2013 Dec;16(8):1150-5
pubmed: 24326168
Arch Ophthalmol. 2001 Jul;119(7):1050-8
pubmed: 11448327
Curr Eye Res. 1998 May;17(5):506-11
pubmed: 9617546
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):967-77
pubmed: 22152165
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):978-88
pubmed: 22152166
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Aug;50(8):3629-35
pubmed: 19255158
Ophthalmology. 2018 Sep;125(9):1332-1343
pubmed: 29653858