Development and psychometric evaluation of the assessment of self-injection questionnaire: an adaptation of the self-injection assessment questionnaire.
Adult
Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic
Female
Focus Groups
Humans
Injections
/ instrumentation
Male
Middle Aged
Multicenter Studies as Topic
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Pilot Projects
Psychometrics
/ methods
Qualitative Research
Reproducibility of Results
Self Administration
/ instrumentation
Cognitive debriefing
Concept elicitation
Exit interviews
Focus groups
Patient-reported outcomes
Psychometric analysis
Rheumatology
Self-injection
Journal
Health and quality of life outcomes
ISSN: 1477-7525
Titre abrégé: Health Qual Life Outcomes
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101153626
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Nov 2020
04 Nov 2020
Historique:
received:
29
04
2020
accepted:
22
10
2020
entrez:
5
11
2020
pubmed:
6
11
2020
medline:
23
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments provide robust and effective means of evaluating patients' treatment experience; however, none adequately cover experience using self-injection devices with enhanced features, such as an electromechanical autoinjector (e-Device). The aim of this study was to develop a PRO instrument that accurately assesses patient experience of using an e-Device and to evaluate its psychometric properties. A mixed-methods approach was taken; two parallel, targeted literature reviews were conducted to identify relevant concepts and existing self-injection PRO instruments that could be adapted. Patient feedback obtained from two focus groups was used to inform initial instrument development. The pilot instrument was then administered in a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 clinical study in which patients self-injected certolizumab pegol using an e-Device, to gather evidence of its psychometric qualities. Exit interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of patients enrolled in the study to confirm the appropriateness and clarity of the items included and cognitively debrief the instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on all items, and each domain's internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's ɑ. The literature searches identified several e-Device-specific concepts related to device features, device function, side effects/reactions/pain, confidence, and interference/convenience in daily life. Seven existing PRO instruments were identified. The Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ), containing pre- and post-injection questionnaire modules, was selected as most suitable and adapted using feedback from 19 patients in the two focus groups to form the pilot Assessment of Self-Injection (ASI) questionnaire. CFA resulted in some changes to the grouping of items in the post-injection module domains following psychometric evaluation of the ASI. Internal consistency was satisfactory for all pre- and post-injection domains (ɑ > 0.8). Cognitive debriefing results from 12 patient exit interviews confirmed the ASI's appropriateness and clarity. The ASI was developed iteratively with patient input and was evaluated in its intended clinical context of use. Psychometric analyses indicated promising cross-sectional results; the ASI was well understood and considered relevant by patients self-injecting using the e-Device, suggesting that it could be used in real-world settings to aid with clinical decision making. NCT03357471.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments provide robust and effective means of evaluating patients' treatment experience; however, none adequately cover experience using self-injection devices with enhanced features, such as an electromechanical autoinjector (e-Device). The aim of this study was to develop a PRO instrument that accurately assesses patient experience of using an e-Device and to evaluate its psychometric properties.
METHODS
METHODS
A mixed-methods approach was taken; two parallel, targeted literature reviews were conducted to identify relevant concepts and existing self-injection PRO instruments that could be adapted. Patient feedback obtained from two focus groups was used to inform initial instrument development. The pilot instrument was then administered in a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 clinical study in which patients self-injected certolizumab pegol using an e-Device, to gather evidence of its psychometric qualities. Exit interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of patients enrolled in the study to confirm the appropriateness and clarity of the items included and cognitively debrief the instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on all items, and each domain's internal consistency was measured using Cronbach's ɑ.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The literature searches identified several e-Device-specific concepts related to device features, device function, side effects/reactions/pain, confidence, and interference/convenience in daily life. Seven existing PRO instruments were identified. The Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ), containing pre- and post-injection questionnaire modules, was selected as most suitable and adapted using feedback from 19 patients in the two focus groups to form the pilot Assessment of Self-Injection (ASI) questionnaire. CFA resulted in some changes to the grouping of items in the post-injection module domains following psychometric evaluation of the ASI. Internal consistency was satisfactory for all pre- and post-injection domains (ɑ > 0.8). Cognitive debriefing results from 12 patient exit interviews confirmed the ASI's appropriateness and clarity.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The ASI was developed iteratively with patient input and was evaluated in its intended clinical context of use. Psychometric analyses indicated promising cross-sectional results; the ASI was well understood and considered relevant by patients self-injecting using the e-Device, suggesting that it could be used in real-world settings to aid with clinical decision making.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
NCT03357471.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33148261
doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01606-7
pii: 10.1186/s12955-020-01606-7
pmc: PMC7640481
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03357471']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
355Références
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 18;7(9):e015872
pubmed: 28928177
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009 Sep 09;7:83
pubmed: 19740444
Drug Deliv. 2019 Dec;26(1):384-392
pubmed: 30905213
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Oct 09;10:126
pubmed: 23046797
Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2020 Jun;17(6):855-862
pubmed: 32239971
Adv Ther. 2018 Jan;35(1):100-115
pubmed: 29222625
J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):231-40
pubmed: 15705040
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2014 Aug 06;8:1061-71
pubmed: 25125973
Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2020 May;17(5):705-711
pubmed: 32154740
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1075-83
pubmed: 19804437
Acta Neurol Scand. 2006 Mar;113(3):156-62
pubmed: 16441244
Arthritis Res Ther. 2004;6 Suppl 2:S19-23
pubmed: 15228617
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011 Nov 01;5(6):1563-71
pubmed: 22226279
Microbiol Spectr. 2016 Aug;4(4):
pubmed: 27726761
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011 Jan 13;9:2
pubmed: 21232106
J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2017 Aug 28;30(9):989-993
pubmed: 28771439
Am J Med Sci. 2015 Feb;349(2):151-6
pubmed: 25474222
Med Care. 1989 Mar;27(3 Suppl):S178-89
pubmed: 2646488
Qual Health Res. 2005 May;15(5):583-5
pubmed: 15802536