Patient-reported outcome measures for medication treatment satisfaction: a systematic review of measure development and measurement properties.

Humans Patient Reported Outcome Measures Patient Satisfaction Quality of Life Surveys and Questionnaires Reproducibility of Results
COSMIN Measurement properties Medication treatment satisfaction Patient-reported outcome measures Systematic review

Journal

BMC medicine
ISSN: 1741-7015
Titre abrégé: BMC Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101190723

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 Sep 2024
Historique:
received: 13 01 2024
accepted: 13 08 2024
medline: 2 9 2024
pubmed: 2 9 2024
entrez: 1 9 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Medication Treatment Satisfaction (M-TS) from the patients' perspective is important for comprehensively evaluating the effect of medicines. The extent to which current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for M-TS are valid, reliable, responsive, and interpretable remains unclear. To assess the measurement properties of existing PROMs for M-TS and to highlight research gaps. Using PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane library (Ovid), IPA (Ovid), PsycINFO, Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Questionnaires biomedical databases, and four Chinese databases, we performed a systematic search for studies addressing the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS. Based on the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, pairs of reviewers independently assessed the measurement properties of the PROMs and rated the quality of evidence on the measurement properties of each PROM. (The Open Science Framework registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8S5ZM ). This review identified 69 PROMs for M-TS in 114 studies (four generic, 32 disease-specific, and 33 drug-specific) of which 60 were intended for adults. All provided limited or no information regarding interpretability. Most demonstrated appropriate construct validity including convergent validity (39/69) and discriminative or known-groups validity (40/69) (high to moderate quality of evidence). Only a few provided evidence of sufficient content validity (8/69), structural validity (13/69), and internal consistency (11/69). Of 38 PROMs reporting test-retest reliability, results in 24 provided evidence of satisfactory test-retest reliability (18 with high to moderate, 6 with low to very low quality of evidence). Few PROMs reported responsiveness (16/69). Two generic PROMs (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication initial Version 1.4, TSQM-1.4; Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire, SATMED-Q) and one drug-specific PROM (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, ITSQ) demonstrated both satisfactory validity and reliability. Most existing PROMs for M-TS require further exploration of measurement properties. Reporting guidelines are needed to enhance the reporting quality of the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Medication Treatment Satisfaction (M-TS) from the patients' perspective is important for comprehensively evaluating the effect of medicines. The extent to which current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for M-TS are valid, reliable, responsive, and interpretable remains unclear. To assess the measurement properties of existing PROMs for M-TS and to highlight research gaps.
METHODS METHODS
Using PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane library (Ovid), IPA (Ovid), PsycINFO, Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Questionnaires biomedical databases, and four Chinese databases, we performed a systematic search for studies addressing the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS. Based on the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, pairs of reviewers independently assessed the measurement properties of the PROMs and rated the quality of evidence on the measurement properties of each PROM. (The Open Science Framework registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8S5ZM ).
RESULTS RESULTS
This review identified 69 PROMs for M-TS in 114 studies (four generic, 32 disease-specific, and 33 drug-specific) of which 60 were intended for adults. All provided limited or no information regarding interpretability. Most demonstrated appropriate construct validity including convergent validity (39/69) and discriminative or known-groups validity (40/69) (high to moderate quality of evidence). Only a few provided evidence of sufficient content validity (8/69), structural validity (13/69), and internal consistency (11/69). Of 38 PROMs reporting test-retest reliability, results in 24 provided evidence of satisfactory test-retest reliability (18 with high to moderate, 6 with low to very low quality of evidence). Few PROMs reported responsiveness (16/69). Two generic PROMs (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication initial Version 1.4, TSQM-1.4; Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire, SATMED-Q) and one drug-specific PROM (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, ITSQ) demonstrated both satisfactory validity and reliability.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Most existing PROMs for M-TS require further exploration of measurement properties. Reporting guidelines are needed to enhance the reporting quality of the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1186/s12916-024-03560-3 PMID: 39218858
pubmed: 39218858
doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03560-3
pii: 10.1186/s12916-024-03560-3
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

347

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Shikiar R, Rentz AM. Satisfaction with medication: an overview of conceptual, methodologic, and regulatory issues. Value Health. 2004;7(2):204–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.72252.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.72252.x pubmed: 15164810
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). FDA patient-focused drug development guidance series for enhancing the incorporation of the patient’s voice in medical product development and regulatory decision making. 2018–2023. [Online]. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs/fda-patient-focused-drug-development-guidance-series-enhancing-incorporation-patients-voice-medical . Accessed 18 Aug 2023.
European Medicines Agency Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. 2 to the Guideline on the Evaluation of Anticancer Medicinal Products in Man: The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measures in Oncology Studies EMA/CHMP/292464/2014. London, England: European Medicines Agency; 2016.
Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA. 2003;290(12):1624–32. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.290.12.1624 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.290.12.1624 pubmed: 14506122
Barbosa CD, Balp MM, Kulich K, Germain N, Rofail D. A literature review to explore the link between treatment satisfaction and adherence, compliance, and persistence. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2012;6:39–48. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S24752 .
doi: 10.2147/ppa.S24752 pubmed: 22272068 pmcid: 3262489
DeVellis RF, Thorpe CT. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2021.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Silver Spring, MD: US Food and Drug Administration; 2009.
Black N. Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ. 2013;346:f167. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f167 .
doi: 10.1136/bmj.f167 pubmed: 23358487
Krogsgaard MR, Brodersen J, Jensen J, Hansen CF, Comins JD. Potential problems in the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and reporting of PROMs data in sports science. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2021;31(6):1249–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.13888 .
doi: 10.1111/sms.13888 pubmed: 33231328
Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Bouter LM, Vet HC, Terwee CB. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument. Braz J Phys Ther. 2016;20(2):105–13. https://doi.org/10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0143 .
doi: 10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0143 pubmed: 26786084 pmcid: 4900032
Ioannidis JPA, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet. 2014;383(9912):166–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62227-8 .
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62227-8 pubmed: 24411645 pmcid: 4697939
Rofail D, Taylor F, Regnault A, Filonenko A. Treatment satisfaction instruments for different purposes during a product’s lifecycle: keeping the end in mind. Patient. 2011;4(4):227–40. https://doi.org/10.2165/11595280-000000000-00000 .
doi: 10.2165/11595280-000000000-00000 pubmed: 21995828
Bharmal M, Viswanathan S. Treatment satisfaction with medication: a review of conceptual frameworks and applications. Value Health. 2010;13(7):A338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-3015(11)72335-X .
doi: 10.1016/S1098-3015(11)72335-X
Guglieri M, Bushby K, McDermott MP, et al. Effect of different corticosteroid dosing regimens on clinical outcomes in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2022;327(15):1456–68. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.4315 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.4315 pubmed: 35381069 pmcid: 8984930
Buse JB, Nauck M, Forst T, et al. Exenatide once weekly versus liraglutide once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes (duration-6): a randomised, open-label study. Lancet. 2013;381(9861):117–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61267-7 .
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61267-7 pubmed: 23141817
Basch E, Reeve BB, Mitchell SA, et al. Development of the national cancer institute’s patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE). JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014;106(9). https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju244 .
Sælen MG, Hjelle LV, Aarsæther E, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after curative treatment for prostate cancer with prostatectomy, primary radiotherapy or salvage radiotherapy. Acta Oncologica. 2023;62(6):657–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2023.2224051 .
doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2023.2224051 pubmed: 37353983
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71 pubmed: 33782057 pmcid: 8005924
Prinsen CAC, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1147–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3 pubmed: 29435801 pmcid: 5891568
Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, De Vet HC, et al. COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) - user manual version 1.0 February. 2018. Available at: https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-syst-review-for-PROMs-manual_version-1_feb-2018.pdf . Accessed 23 May 2023.
Terwee CB, Prinsen CA, Chiarotto A, et al. COSMIN methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs - user manual version 1.0 February. 2018. Available at: https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/COSMIN-methodology-for-content-validity-user-manual-v1.pdf . Accessed 23 May 2023.
Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 pubmed: 17161752
Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC, et al. COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1171–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4 pubmed: 29260445
Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):383–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026 pubmed: 21195583
Atkinson MJ, Sinha A, Hass SL, et al. Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-12 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-2-12 pubmed: 14987333 pmcid: 398419
Regnault A, Balp MM, Kulich K, Viala-Danten M. Validation of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication in patients with cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros. 2012;11(6):494–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcf.2012.04.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2012.04.007 pubmed: 22583743
Trujols J, Iraurgi I, Sinol N, Portella MJ, de los Cobos JP, et al. Satisfaction with methadone as a medication psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;32(1):69–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCP.0b013e3182401e09 .
doi: 10.1097/JCP.0b013e3182401e09 pubmed: 22198457
Shilbayeh SAR, Alyahya SA, Alshammari NH, Almutairi WA, Shaheen E. Treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication: validation of the translated Arabic version among patients undergoing warfarin therapy in Saudi Arabia. Value Health Reg Issues. 2018;16:14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2018.01.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2018.01.007 pubmed: 29626737
AL-M LAI, Allela OQB, Salih HM, Ahmed IH. Medication satisfaction in diabetic patients: Kurdish version. J Public Health (Berl). 2020;30(4):879–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-020-01367-z .
doi: 10.1007/s10389-020-01367-z
Atkinson MJ, Kumar R, Cappelleri JC, Hass SL. Hierarchical construct validity of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM Version II) among outpatient pharmacy consumers. Value Health. 2005;8:S9–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00066.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00066.x pubmed: 16336491
Delestras S, Roustit M, Bedouch P, et al. Comparison between two generic questionnaires to assess satisfaction with medication in chronic diseases. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(2):e56247. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056247 .
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056247 pubmed: 23437104 pmcid: 3577836
Shang YB, Liu HX, Yu LX, et al. Transcultural adaptation of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication. Chin Nurs Manag. 2018;18(05):612-616. Available at: http://www.zghlgl.com/EN/ https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2018.05.008 . 23 May 2023.
Shen ZY, Ding SQ, Zhong ZQ, Shi SJ, Li SG.Validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication-second edition in patients with hypertension. Chin Men. Health J. 2021;35(04):277-283. Available at: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.1873.R.20210309.1832.008.html . 23 May 2023.
Watanabe-Fujinuma E, Banderas BF, Koretsune Y, et al. Psychometric validation of anti-clot treatment scale and treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication version II in Japanese patients with atrial fibrillation. J Med Econ. 2019;22(8):798–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2019.1609003 .
doi: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1609003 pubmed: 30995146
Abdshah A, Parsaeian M, Nasimi M, Ghiasi M. Validating the “treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication” in Persian and evaluating treatment satisfaction among patients with psoriasis. Value Health Reg Issues. 2022;29:16–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vhri.2021.06.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2021.06.008 pubmed: 34800824
Bharmal M, Payne K, Atkinson MJ, Desrosiers MP, Morisky DE, Gemmen E. Validation of an abbreviated treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM-9) among patients on antihypertensive medications. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-7-36 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-36 pubmed: 19397800 pmcid: 2678998
Ruiz MA, Pardo A, Rejas J, Soto J, Villasante F, Aranguren JL. Development and validation of the “treatment satisfaction with medicines questionnaire” (SATMED-Q)©. Value Health. 2008;11(5):913–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00323.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00323.x pubmed: 18494753
Rejas J, Ruiz M, Pardo A, Soto J. Detecting changes in patient treatment satisfaction with medicines: the SATMED-Q. Value Health. 2013;16(1):88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2224 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2224 pubmed: 23337219
López-Torres López J, Rabanales-Sotos J, López-Torres Hidalgo MR, MiliánGarcía RM, LópezMartínez C, Blázquez Abellán G. Reliability and validity of the treatment satisfaction with medicines questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in persons with arterial hypertension. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(6):3212. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063212 .
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18063212 pubmed: 33808854 pmcid: 8003792
Świątoniowska-Lonc N, Kołtuniuk A, Jankowska-Polańska B. Psychometric properties of the treatment satisfaction with medicines questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in patients with diabetes, arterial hypertension and heart failure. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(3):1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031088 .
doi: 10.3390/ijerph19031088 pubmed: 35162111 pmcid: 8834327
Cappelleri JC, Gerber RA, Kourides IA, Gelfand RA. Development and factor analysis of a questionnaire to measure patient satisfaction with injected and inhaled insulin for type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(12):1799–803. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.23.12.1799 .
doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.12.1799 pubmed: 11128356
Anderson RT, Skovlund SE, Marrero D, et al. Development and validation of the insulin treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Clin Ther. 2004;26(4):565–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(04)90059-8 .
doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(04)90059-8 pubmed: 15189754
Brod M, Christensen T, Bushnell D. Maximizing the value of validation findings to better understand treatment satisfaction issues for diabetes. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(6):1053–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9209-1 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-007-9209-1 pubmed: 17516149
Brod M, Skovlund SE, Wittrup-Jensen KU. Measuring the impact of diabetes through patient report of treatment satisfaction, productivity and symptom experience. Qual Life Res. 2006;15(3):481–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-1624-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-005-1624-6 pubmed: 16547787
Woodcock A, Bain S, Charlton M, Bradley C. Extent of satisfaction with tablets and food-timing in sulphonyl urea-treated diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2007;78(3):324–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2005.07.013 .
doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2005.07.013 pubmed: 17517445
Donatti C, Wild D, Horblyuk R, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the satisfaction with oral anti-diabetic agent scale (SOADAS). Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2008;80(1):108–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2007.11.005 .
doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2007.11.005 pubmed: 18207601
Lin YJ, Wang CY, Chang EH, Cheng SW, Ko Y. Translation, revision, and validation of the Chinese version of the satisfaction with oral anti-diabetic agent scale (C-SOADAS) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:667–72. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S162268 .
doi: 10.2147/ppa.S162268 pubmed: 29750021 pmcid: 5936009
Anderson RT, Girman CJ, Pawaskar MD, et al. Diabetes medication satisfaction tool: a focus on treatment regimens. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(1):51–3. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc08-0856 .
doi: 10.2337/dc08-0856 pubmed: 18931098 pmcid: 2606829
Monahan PO, Lane KA, Hayes RP, McHorney CA, Marrero DG. Reliability and validity of an instrument for assessing patients’ perceptions about medications for diabetes: the PAM-D. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(7):941–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9510-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9510-2 pubmed: 19609723
Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Psychometric properties of an instrument for assessing treatment satisfaction associated with pramlintide use. Diabetes Educ. 2009;35(1):136–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145721708326989 .
doi: 10.1177/0145721708326989 pubmed: 19244569
Sampson MJ, Singh H, Dhatariya KK, Jones C, Walden E, Bradley C. Psychometric validation and use of a novel diabetes in-patient treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Diabet Med. 2009;26(7):729–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02754.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02754.x pubmed: 19573123
Ishii H, Oda E. Reproducibility and validity of a satisfaction questionnaire on hypoglycemic agents: the oral hypoglycemic agent questionnaire (OHA-Q). Diabetol Int. 2012;3(3):152–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13340-012-0074-y .
doi: 10.1007/s13340-012-0074-y
Peyrot M, Harshaw Q, Shillington AC, Xu Y, Rubin RR. Validation of a tool to assess medication treatment satisfaction in patients with type 2 diabetes: the diabetes medication system rating questionnaire (DMSRQ). Diabet Med. 2012;29(8):1060–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03538.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03538.x pubmed: 22150434
Peyrot M, Xu Y, Rubin RR. Development and validation of the diabetes medication system rating questionnaire-short form. Diabet Med. 2014;31(10):1237–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.12453 .
doi: 10.1111/dme.12453 pubmed: 24673614 pmcid: 4232890
Manning ML, Singh H, Stoner K, Habif S. The development and psychometric validation of the diabetes impact and device satisfaction scale for individuals with type 1 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020;14(2):309–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296819897976 .
doi: 10.1177/1932296819897976 pubmed: 32028790 pmcid: 7196859
Mcmillan CV, Bradley C, Woodcock A, Razvi S, Weaver JU. Design of new questionnaires to measure quality of life and treatment satisfaction in hypothyroidism. Thyroid. 2004;14(11):916–25. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2004.14.916 .
doi: 10.1089/thy.2004.14.916 pubmed: 15671770
McMillan C, Bradley C, Razvi S, Weaver J. Psychometric evaluation of a new questionnaire measuring treatment satisfaction in hypothyroidism: the ThyTSQ. Value Health. 2006;9(2):132–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00091.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00091.x pubmed: 16626417
Hill CD, Fehnel SE, Bobula JD, Yu H, McLeod LD. Development and preliminary validation of the menopause symptoms treatment satisfaction questionnaire (MS-TSQ). Menopause. 2007;14(6):1047–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/gme.0b013e31803816b8 .
doi: 10.1097/gme.0b013e31803816b8 pubmed: 17413838
Fleseriu M, Fogelfeld L, Gordon MB, et al. Development of a novel patient-reported measure for acromegaly: the Acro-TSQ. Pituitary. 2019;22(6):581–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-019-00986-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s11102-019-00986-4 pubmed: 31522359 pmcid: 6842345
Fleseriu M, Fogelfeld L, Gordon MB, et al. An evaluation of the acromegaly treatment satisfaction questionnaire (Acro-TSQ) in adult patients with acromegaly, including correlations with other patient-reported outcome measures: data from two large multicenter international studies. Pituitary. 2020;23(4):347–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-020-01038-y .
doi: 10.1007/s11102-020-01038-y pubmed: 32221764 pmcid: 7316852
Samsa G, Matchar DB, Dolor RJ, et al. A new instrument for measuring anticoagulation-related quality of life: development and preliminary validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-22 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-2-22 pubmed: 15132746 pmcid: 420491
Pelegrino FM, Dantas RA, Corbi IS, da Silva Carvalho AR, Schmidt A, Pazin FA. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the duke anticoagulation satisfaction scale. J Clin Nurs. 2012;21(17–18):2509–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03869.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03869.x pubmed: 22077911
Riva N, Borg Xuereb C, Ageno W, Makris M, Gatt A. Validation and psychometric properties of the Maltese version of the duke anticoagulation satisfaction scale (DASS). Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2019;12:741–52. https://doi.org/10.2147/prbm.S216617 .
doi: 10.2147/prbm.S216617 pubmed: 31695528 pmcid: 6717846
AlAmmari M, Sultana K, AlHarbi SN, et al. Validation and psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the duke anticoagulation satisfaction scale (DASS). Original Research. Front Pharmacol. 2020;11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.587489 .
Wu Y, Dong S, Li X, Xu H, Xie X. The transcultural adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the duke anticoagulation satisfaction scale. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:790293. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.790293 .
doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.790293 pubmed: 35281922 pmcid: 8904917
Prins MH, Guillemin I, Gilet H, et al. Scoring and psychometric validation of the perception of anticoagulant treatment questionnaire (PACT-Q). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:30. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-7-30 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-30 pubmed: 19348685 pmcid: 2686675
Riva N, Borg Xuereb C, Makris M, Ageno W, Gatt A. Reliability and validity of the Maltese version of the perception of anticoagulant treatment questionnaire (PACT-Q). Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13:969–79. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S207498 .
doi: 10.2147/ppa.S207498 pubmed: 31417242 pmcid: 6593733
Cano SJ, Lamping DL, Bamber L, Smith S. The anti-clot treatment scale (ACTS) in clinical trials: cross-cultural validation in venous thromboembolism patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:120. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-10-120 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-120 pubmed: 23013426 pmcid: 3478969
Suárez C, Pose A, Montero-Pérez-Barquero M, et al. Validation of satisfaction questionnaire ACTS in outpatients with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulants in Spain. ALADIN study Med Clin (Barc). 2016;147(5):192–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2016.05.024 .
doi: 10.1016/j.medcli.2016.05.024 pubmed: 27423653
Comuth WJ, Lauridsen HH, Kristensen SD, Münster A-MB. Translation, cultural adaptation, and psychometric properties of the Danish version of the anti-clot treatment scale. TH Open. 2018;02(03):e280–90. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1670631 .
doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1670631
Shilbayeh SAR, Ibrahim AA. The anti-clot treatment scale (ACTS): validation of the translated Arabic version among patients undergoing warfarin therapy in Saudi Arabia. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):215. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01471-4 .
doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01471-4 pubmed: 32631346 pmcid: 7339378
Shilbayeh SAR, Ismail S. Translation, pilot psychometric validation, and comparative performance of the Arabic version of the anti-clot treatment scale (ACTS). J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2021;13(1):61–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_395_20 .
doi: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_395_20 pubmed: 34084049
Yi YL. Translation and preliminary application of the anti-clot treatment scale (ACTS). Nanhua University, China; 2021. https://doi.org/10.27234/d.cnki.gnhuu.2021.000959 .
Mathias SD, Warren EH, Colwell HH, Sung JC. A new treatment satisfaction measure for asthmatics: a validation study. Qual Life Res. 2000;9(7):873–82. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008913209828 .
doi: 10.1023/a:1008913209828 pubmed: 11297030
Campbell JL, Kiebert GM, Partridge MR. Development of the satisfaction with inhaled asthma treatment questionnaire. Eur Respir J. 2003;22(1):127–34. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.03.00097503 .
doi: 10.1183/09031936.03.00097503 pubmed: 12882462
Martin Fernandez J, Barcina Sanchez C, Jimenez Barcia FJ, Marazuela Bermejo R. Validation study of the Spanish adaptation of the satisfaction with inhaled asthma treatment questionnaire. Arch Bronconeumol. 2006;42(11):575.
doi: 10.1016/S1579-2129(06)60590-9 pubmed: 17125692
Dońka K, Czarnocki KJ, Emeryk A. Validation of the polish version of satisfaction with asthma treatment questionnaire (SATQ). Postepy Dermatol Alergol. 2017;34(1):77–81. https://doi.org/10.5114/ada.2017.65625 .
doi: 10.5114/ada.2017.65625 pubmed: 28261035 pmcid: 5329109
Kozma CM, Slaton TL, Monz BU, Hodder R, Reese PR. Development and validation of a patient satisfaction and preference questionnaire for inhalation devices. Treat Respir Med. 2005;4(1):41–52. https://doi.org/10.2165/00151829-200504010-00005 .
doi: 10.2165/00151829-200504010-00005 pubmed: 15725049
Davis KH, Black L, Sleath B. Validation of the patient perception of migraine questionnaire. Value Health. 2002;5(5):422–30. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1524-4733.2002.55120.x .
doi: 10.1046/J.1524-4733.2002.55120.x pubmed: 12201859
Revicki DA, Kimel M, Beusterien K, et al. Validation of the revised patient perception of migraine questionnaire: measuring satisfaction with acute migraine treatment. Headache. 2006;46(2):240–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00289.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00289.x pubmed: 16492233
Kimel M, Hsieh R, McCormack J, Burch S, Revicki D. Validation of the revised patient perception of migraine questionnaire (PPMQ-R): measuring satisfaction with acute migraine treatment in clinical trials. Cephalalgia. 2008;28(5):510–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2007.01524.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2007.01524.x pubmed: 18384420
Patrick DL, Martin ML, Bushmell DM, Pesa J. Measuring satisfaction with migraine treatment: expectations, importance, outcomes, and global ratings. Clin Ther. 2003;25(11):2920–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(03)80345-4 .
doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(03)80345-4 pubmed: 14693316
Martin ML, Patrick DL, Bushnell DM, Gandra SR, Gilchrist K. Further validation of an individualized migraine treatment satisfaction measure. Value Health. 2008;11(5):904–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00320.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00320.x pubmed: 18494756
Baró E, Casado A, García-Cases C, Clerch L, Ribas S. Assessing satisfaction with pain medication in primary care patients: development and psychometric validation of a new measure. Clin Ther. 2004;26(7):1124–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2918(04)90185-3 .
doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(04)90185-3 pubmed: 15336478
Evans CJ, Trudeau E, Mertzanis P, et al. Development and validation of the pain treatment satisfaction scale (PTSS): a patient satisfaction questionnaire for use in patients with chronic or acute pain. Pain. 2004;112(3):254–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.005 .
doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.005 pubmed: 15561380
Wong WS, Chen PP, Chow YF, Wong S, Fielding R. The reliability and validity of the Cantonese version of the pain treatment satisfaction scale (ChPTSS) in a sample of Chinese patients with chronic pain. Pain Med. 2015;16(12):2316–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12790 .
doi: 10.1111/pme.12790 pubmed: 26179924
Cramer JA, Cuffel BJ, Divan V, Al-Sabbagh A, Glassman M. Patient satisfaction with an injection device for multiple sclerosis treatment. Acta Neurol Scand. 2006;113(3):156–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.2005.00568.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0404.2005.00568.x pubmed: 16441244
Muntéis Olivas E, Navarro Mascarell G, Meca Lallana J, et al. Cultural adaptation and validation of a peninsular Spanish version of the MSTCQ (©) (multiple sclerosis treatment concerns questionnaire). Neurologia. 2017;32(1):29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrl.2014.12.011 .
doi: 10.1016/j.nrl.2014.12.011 pubmed: 25697827
Biraben A, Allaf B. An instrument to assess patient satisfaction with epilepsy treatment. Epilepsy Behav. 2015;43:24–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.11.031 .
doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.11.031 pubmed: 25549951
Abetz L, Coombs JH, Keininger DL, et al. Development of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire: item generation and content validity testing. Value Health. 2005;8:S41–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00073.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00073.x pubmed: 16336488
Trask PC, Tellefsen C, Espindle D, Getter C, Hsu M-A. Psychometric validation of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire. Value Health. 2008;11(4):669–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00310.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00310.x pubmed: 18194397
Park SJ, An SM, Kim SH. Development of a Korean version of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire (CTSQ): cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(2):431–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0164-0 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0164-0 pubmed: 22476571
Cheung K, de Mol M, Visser S, Den Oudsten BL, Stricker BH, Aerts JGJV. Reliability and validity of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire in lung cancer. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(1):71–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1062-z .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1062-z pubmed: 26195317
Norhaliza Abd H, Nur Amirah H, Nizuwan A, Mohammad Farris Iman Leong Bin A. Validation of the Malay version of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire among Malaysian cancer patients. Malaysian J Public Health Med. 2021;21(1):274–285. https://doi.org/10.37268/mjphm/vol.21/no.1/art.845 .
Theodore-Oklota C, Humphrey L, Wiesner C, Schnetzler G, Hudgens S, Campbell A. Validation of a treatment satisfaction questionnaire in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: assessing the change from intravenous to subcutaneous administration of rituximab. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:1767–76. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S108489 .
doi: 10.2147/ppa.S108489 pubmed: 27695295 pmcid: 5028167
Coyne KS, Wiklund I, Schmier J, Halling K, Degl’ Innocenti A, Revicki D. Development and validation of a disease-specific treatment satisfaction questionnaire for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003;18(9):907–15. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01674.x .
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01674.x pubmed: 14616154
Shikiar R, Flood E, Siddique R, Howell J, Dodd SL. Development and validation of the gastroesophageal reflux disease treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Dig Dis Sci. 2005;50(11):2025–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-005-3002-1 .
doi: 10.1007/s10620-005-3002-1 pubmed: 16240210
Coyne K, Joshua-Gotlib S, Kimel M, Thompson C, Lewis A, Danilewitz M. Validation of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for Crohn’s disease (TSQ-C). Dig Dis Sci. 2005;50(2):252–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-005-1591-3 .
doi: 10.1007/s10620-005-1591-3 pubmed: 15745081
Marant C, Arnould B, Marrel A, et al. Assessing patients’ satisfaction with anti-TNFα treatment in Crohn’s disease: qualitative steps of the development of a new questionnaire. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2011;4:173–80. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S18585 .
doi: 10.2147/CEG.S18585 pubmed: 21904463 pmcid: 3163923
Gilet H, Arnould B, Fofana F, et al. Measuring patients’ satisfaction with their anti-TNF treatment in severe Crohn’s disease: scoring and psychometric validation of the satisfaction for patients in Crohn’s disease questionnaire (SPACE-Q©). Patient Prefer Adherence. 2014;8:1671–81. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S72004 .
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S72004 pubmed: 25525343 pmcid: 4262217
Rofail D, Gray R, Gournay K. The development and internal consistency of the satisfaction with antipsychotic medication scale. Psychol Med. 2005;35(7):1063–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291705004526 .
doi: 10.1017/s0033291705004526 pubmed: 16045072
Görtz-Dorten A, Breuer D, Hautmann C, Rothenberger A, Döpfner M. What contributes to patient and parent satisfaction with medication in the treatment of children with ADHD? A report on the development of a new rating scale. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011;20 Suppl2(Suppl 2):S297-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-011-0207-z .
doi: 10.1007/s00787-011-0207-z
Nordon C, Falissard B, Gerard S, et al. Patient satisfaction with psychotropic drugs: validation of the patient satisfaction with psychotropic (PASAP) scale in patients with bipolar disorder. Eur Psychiatry. 2014;29(3):183–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2013.03.001 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2013.03.001 pubmed: 23769326
Kalali A. Patient satisfaction with, and acceptability of, atypical antipsychotics. Curr Med Res Opin. 1999;15(2):135–7. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007999909113374 .
doi: 10.1185/03007999909113374 pubmed: 10494497
Vernon MK, Revicki DA, Awad AG, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the medication satisfaction questionnaire (MSQ) to assess satisfaction with antipsychotic medication among schizophrenia patients. Schizophr Res. 2010;118(1):271–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2010.01.021 .
doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2010.01.021 pubmed: 20172695
de los Cobos JP, Trujols J, Siñol N, Batlle F. Development and validation of the scale to assess satisfaction with medications for addiction treatment-methadone for heroin addiction (SASMAT-METHER). Drug Alcohol Depend. 2014;142:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.05.024 .
doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.05.024 pubmed: 24975476
de los Pérez Cobos J, Trujols J, Alcaraz S, Siñol N, Lozano Ó, González-Saiz F. Development and validation of the scale to assess satisfaction with medications for addiction treatment - buprenorphine-naloxone for heroin addiction (SASMAT-BUNHER). Int J Drug Policy. 2018;58:126–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.06.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.06.007
Woodcock A, Bradley C. Validation of the HIV treatment satisfaction questionnaire (HIVTSQ). Qual Life Res. 2001;10(6):517–31. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1013050904635 .
doi: 10.1023/a:1013050904635 pubmed: 11789552
Woodcock A, Bradley C. Validation of the revised 10-item HIV treatment satisfaction questionnaire status version and new change version. Value Health. 2006;9(5):320–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00121.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00121.x pubmed: 16961550
Ventura Cerdá JM, Casado Gómez MA, Morales González JM, Ortega Valín L, Ibarra Barruéta O, Escobar RI. Psychometric characteristics of the antiretroviral treatment satisfaction scale (ESTAR): ARPAS study (I). Farm Hosp. 2007;31(6):331–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1130-6343(07)75405-3 .
doi: 10.1016/s1130-6343(07)75405-3 pubmed: 18348664
Taback NA, Bradley C. Validation of the genital herpes treatment satisfaction questionnaire (GHerpTSQ) in status and change versions. Qual Life Res. 2006;15(6):1043–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-0048-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-006-0048-2 pubmed: 16900284
Szeinbach SL, Baran RW, Dietz B, Gazzouola Rocca L, Littlefield D, Yawn BP. Development and validation of the chronic hepatitis C virus treatment satisfaction (HCVTSat) instrument. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013;37(5):573–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.12202 .
doi: 10.1111/apt.12202 pubmed: 23289740
Atkinson MJ, Stewart WC, Fain JM, et al. A new measure of patient satisfaction with ocular hypotensive medications: the treatment satisfaction survey for intraocular pressure (TSS-IOP). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:67. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-1-67 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-67 pubmed: 14617372 pmcid: 280705
Woodcock A, Bradley C, Plowright R, Ffytche T, Kennedy-Martin T, Hirsch A. The influence of diabetic retinopathy on quality of life: interviews to guide the design of a condition-specific, individualised questionnaire: The RetDQoL. Patient Educ Couns. 2004;53(3):365–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2003.10.007 .
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2003.10.007 pubmed: 15186876
Brose LS, Bradley C. Psychometric development of the retinopathy treatment satisfaction questionnaire (RetTSQ). Psychol Health Med. 2009;14(6):740–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548500903431485 .
doi: 10.1080/13548500903431485 pubmed: 20183546
Karadzic J, Stojkovic M, Risimic D, et al. Cross-cultural validation of the retinopathy treatment satisfaction questionnaire status version (RetTSQs) in Serbian community: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(1):e031236. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031236 .
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031236 pubmed: 31959603 pmcid: 7045162
Nordmann J-P, Denis P, Vigneux M, Trudeau E, Guillemin I, Berdeaux G. Development of the conceptual framework for the eye-drop satisfaction questionnaire (EDSQ©) in glaucoma using a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7(1):124. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-124 .
doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-124 pubmed: 17683594 pmcid: 1973077
Regnault A, Viala-Danten M, Gilet H, Berdeaux G. Scoring and psychometric properties of the eye-drop satisfaction questionnaire (EDSQ), an instrument to assess satisfaction and compliance with glaucoma treatment. BMC Ophthalmol. 2010;10:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-10-1 .
doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-10-1 pubmed: 20122146 pmcid: 2832632
Ruiz MA, Pardo A, de la Martinez Casa JM, Polo V, Esquiro J, Soto J. Development of a specific questionnaire measuring patient satisfaction with glaucoma treatment: Glausat. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2010;17(3):131–43. https://doi.org/10.3109/09286581003734852 .
doi: 10.3109/09286581003734852 pubmed: 20455842
Mitchell J, Bradley C. Design and development of the MacTSQ measure of satisfaction with treatment for macular conditions used within the Ivan trial. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2018;2(1):5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0031-z .
doi: 10.1186/s41687-018-0031-z pmcid: 5935020
Marakis TP, Koutsandrea C, Chatzistefanou KI, Tountas Y. Treatment satisfaction of patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents. Int Ophthalmol. 2018;38(2):565–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0492-8 .
doi: 10.1007/s10792-017-0492-8 pubmed: 28285389
Shikiar R, Halpern MT, McGann M, Palmer CS, Seidlin M. The relation of patient satisfaction with treatment of otitis externa to clinical outcomes: development of an instrument. Clin Ther. 1999;21(6):1091–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2918(99)80027-7 .
doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(99)80027-7 pubmed: 10440629
Ruiz MA, Heras F, Alomar A, et al. Development and validation of a questionnaire on “satisfaction with dermatological treatment of hand eczema” (DermaSat). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8(1):127. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-127 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-127 pubmed: 21054872 pmcid: 2992504
Flood EM, Beusterien KM, Green H, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the osteoporosis patient treatment satisfaction questionnaire (OPSAT-Q™), a novel measure to assess satisfaction with bisphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal women. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4(1):42. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-42 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-42 pubmed: 16834773 pmcid: 1550233
Piault E, Evans CJ, Espindle D, Kopp Z, Brubaker L, Abrams P. Development and validation of the overactive bladder satisfaction (OAB-S) questionnaire. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(3):179–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20455 .
doi: 10.1002/nau.20455 pubmed: 17565727
Kimman ML, Rotteveel AH, Wijsenbeek M, et al. Development and pretesting of a questionnaire to assess patient experiences and satisfaction with medications (PESaM Questionnaire). Patient. 2017;10(5):629–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0234-z .
doi: 10.1007/s40271-017-0234-z pubmed: 28357591 pmcid: 5605609
Kimman ML, Wijsenbeek MS, van Kuijk SMJ, et al. Validity of the patient experiences and satisfaction with medications (PESaM) questionnaire. Patient. 2019;12(1):149–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-018-0340-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s40271-018-0340-6 pubmed: 30367435
Althof SE, Corty EW, Levine SB, et al. Edits: development of questionnaires for evaluating satisfaction with treatments for erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1999;53(4):793–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00582-2 .
doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00582-2 pubmed: 10197859
Kubin M, Trudeau E, Gondek K, Seignobos E, Fugl-Meyer AR. Early conceptual and linguistic development of a patient and partner treatment satisfaction scale (TSS) for erectile dysfunction. Eur Urol. 2004;46(6):768–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2004.08.001 . discussion 774-5.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.08.001 pubmed: 15548446
DiBenedetti DB, Gondek K, Sagnier PP, et al. The treatment satisfaction scale: a multidimensional instrument for the assessment of treatment satisfaction for erectile dysfunction patients and their partners. Eur Urol. 2005;48(3):503–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.05.008 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.05.008 pubmed: 15964130
Justícia JL, Baró E, Cardona V, et al. Development of a questionnaire to assess patient satisfaction with allergen-specific immunotherapy in adults: item generation, item reduction, and preliminary validation. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2011;5:239–50. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S19219 .
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S19219 pubmed: 21660106 pmcid: 3105877
Justicia JL, Cardona V, Guardia P, et al. Validation of the first treatment-specific questionnaire for the assessment of patient satisfaction with allergen-specific immunotherapy in allergic patients: the ESPIA questionnaire. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;131(6):1539-1546.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2012.11.049 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2012.11.049 pubmed: 23352631
Mathias SD, Berry P, De Vries J, et al. Development of the systemic lupus erythematosus steroid questionnaire (SSQ): a novel patient-reported outcome tool to assess the impact of oral steroid treatment. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0609-9 .
doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0609-9 pubmed: 28245854 pmcid: 5331641
Rofail D, Abetz L, Viala M, Gait C, Baladi JF, Payne K. Satisfaction and adherence in patients with iron overload receiving iron chelation therapy as assessed by a newly developed patient instrument. Value Health. 2009;12(1):109–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00390.x .
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00390.x pubmed: 18637142
Elalfy MS, Massoud W, Elsherif NH, et al. A new tool for the assessment of satisfaction with iron chelation therapy (ICT-SAT) for patients with β-thalassemia major. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012;58(6):910–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.23413 .
doi: 10.1002/pbc.23413 pubmed: 22232075
Kempton C, Trask P, Parnes A, et al. Development and testing of the satisfaction questionnaire with intravenous or subcutaneous hemophilia injection and results from the phase 3 HAVEN 3 study of emicizumab prophylaxis in persons with hemophilia a without FVIII inhibitors. Haemophilia. 2021;27(2):221–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/hae.14222 .
doi: 10.1111/hae.14222 pubmed: 33506955 pmcid: 8048849
Doll H, Coşkun U, Hartford C, Tomazos I. Concept confirmation of the treatment administration satisfaction questionnaire (TASQ) in rare paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2021;5(1):45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-021-00319-9 .
doi: 10.1186/s41687-021-00319-9 pubmed: 34152498 pmcid: 8217362
Fataneh H-D, Fatemeh Sadat H-B, Fatemeh Y, Samira K. Development and validation of the “treatment satisfaction with traditional medicines” questionnaire (TSTMQ). Trad Integr Med. 2022;7(3):302–9. https://doi.org/10.18502/tim.v7i3.10772 .
doi: 10.18502/tim.v7i3.10772
Geneva: World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases Eleventh Revision (ICD-11). Geneva: World Health Organization. 2022. License: CC BY-ND 3.0 IGO. Available at: https://icd.who.int/en . Accessed 23 May 2023.
World Health Organization. Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classification. Available at: https://www.who.int/tools/atc-ddd-toolkit/atc-classification . Accessed 21 Aug 2023.
IQVIA. Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). Available from: https://www.iqvia.com/solutions/research-and-development/consulting/patient-centered-endpoints/clinical-outcome-assessments-coa/tsqm . Accessed 3 Jul 2024.
Weaver M, Patrick DL, Markson LE, Martin D, Frederic I, Berger M. Issues in the measurement of satisfaction with treatment. Am J Manag Care. 1997;3(4):579–94.
pubmed: 10169526
Yamamoto Y, Yamaguchi A, Bono H, Takagi T. Allie: A database and a search service of abbreviations and long forms. Database. 2011;2011:bar013. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/bar013 The Allie service is available at http://allie.dbcls.jp/ . Accessed 20 Aug 2023.
Niño de Guzmán Quispe E, Martínez García L, Orrego Villagrán C, et al. The perspectives of patients with chronic diseases and their caregivers on self-management interventions: a scoping review of reviews. Patient. 2021;14(6):719–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-021-00514-2 .
Ahmed R, Aslani P. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: an update on medication adherence and persistence in children, adolescents and adults. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2013;13(6):791–815. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2013.841544 .
doi: 10.1586/14737167.2013.841544 pubmed: 24219052
Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, et al. Content validity–establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 2–assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011;14(8):978–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013 pubmed: 22152166
Lasch KE, Marquis P, Vigneux M, et al. PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(8):1087–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9677-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9677-6 pubmed: 20512662 pmcid: 2940042
Ioannidis JPA. How to make more published research true. PLoS Med. 2014;11(10):e1001747. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747 .
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747 pubmed: 25334033 pmcid: 4204808
Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Lane MM. Health-related quality of life measurement in pediatric clinical practice: an appraisal and precept for future research and application. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3(1):34. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-3-34 .
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-3-34 pubmed: 15904527 pmcid: 1156928
Thornicroft G, Brohan E, Rose D, Sartorius N, Leese M. Global pattern of experienced and anticipated discrimination against people with schizophrenia: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet. 2016;373(9661):408–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61817-6 .
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61817-6
van Deursen AJAM, van Dijk JAGM. The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media Soc. 2014;16(3):507–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959 .
doi: 10.1177/1461444813487959
Parker RM, Ratzan SC, Lurie N. Health literacy: a policy challenge for advancing high-quality health care. Health Aff. 2003;22(4):147–53. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.22.4.147 .
doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.22.4.147
Neimann Rasmussen L, Montgomery P. The prevalence of and factors associated with inclusion of non-English language studies in Campbell systematic reviews: a survey and meta-epidemiological study. Syst Rev. 2018;7(1):129. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0786-6 .
doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0786-6 pubmed: 30139391 pmcid: 6107944
Gagnier JJ, Lai J, Mokkink LB, Terwee CB. COSMIN reporting guideline for studies on measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(8):2197–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02822-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02822-4 pubmed: 33818733

Auteurs

Mengting Yang (M)

Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China.
West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Puwen Zhang (P)

Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China.
West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Jillian Halladay (J)

The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton (SJHH), Research Institute of St. Joe's Hamilton Mental Health and Addictions Research Program, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Kun Zou (K)

Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China.

Imti Choonara (I)

School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Xiaorui Ji (X)

West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Shuya Zhang (S)

West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Weiyi Yan (W)

West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Liang Huang (L)

Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China.

Xiaoxi Lu (X)

Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China.
Department of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Huiqing Wang (H)

Medical Simulation Centre, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Yuxin Jiang (Y)

School of Mathematics, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Xinyu Liu (X)

School of Mathematics, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Linan Zeng (L)

Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. LinanZeng@scu.edu.cn.
Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China. LinanZeng@scu.edu.cn.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China. LinanZeng@scu.edu.cn.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China. LinanZeng@scu.edu.cn.

Lingli Zhang (L)

Department of Pharmacy/Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. zhanglingli@scu.edu.cn.
Children's Medicine Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China. zhanglingli@scu.edu.cn.
NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China. zhanglingli@scu.edu.cn.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China. zhanglingli@scu.edu.cn.
Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. zhanglingli@scu.edu.cn.

Gordon H Guyatt (GH)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › Patient-reported outcome measures for...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Collecte de données › Enquêtes et questionnaires › Enquêtes sur les soins de santé › Mesures des résultats rapportés par les patients › Patient-reported outcome measures for...
questionsmedicales.fr › Qualité, accès, évaluation des soins de santé › Qualité des soins de santé › Mécanismes d'évaluation des soins de santé › Satisfaction des patients › Patient-reported outcome measures for...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Mesures épidémiologiques › Démographie › État de santé › Qualité de vie › Patient-reported outcome measures for...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Collecte de données › Enquêtes et questionnaires › Patient-reported outcome measures for...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Méthodologie en recherche épidémiologique › Reproductibilité des résultats › Patient-reported outcome measures for...