50
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Adaptation and validation of the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) in English using an internet platform

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Treatment burden refers to the workload imposed by healthcare on patients, and the effect this has on quality of life. The Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) aims to assess treatment burden in different condition and treatment contexts. Here, we aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of an English version of the TBQ, a scale that was originally developed in French.

          Methods

          The TBQ was translated into English by a forward-backward translation method. Wording and possible missing items were assessed during a pretest involving 200 patients with chronic conditions. Measurement properties of the instrument were assessed online with a patient network, using the PatientsLikeMe website. Dimensional structure of the questionnaire was assessed by factor analysis. Construct validity was assessed by associating TBQ global score wıth clinical variables, adherence to medication assessed by Morisky’s Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8), quality of life (QOL) assessed by the PatientsLikeMe Quality of Life Scale (PLMQOL), and patients’ confidence in their knowledge of their conditions and treatments. Reliability was determined by a test–retest method.

          Results

          In total, 610 patients with chronic conditions, mainly from the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, completed the TBQ between September and October 2013. The English TBQ showed a unidimensional structure with Cronbach α of 0.90. The TBQ global score was negatively correlated with the PLMQOL score (r s = −0.50; p < 0.0001). Low rather than moderate or high adherence to medication was associated with high TBQ score (mean [SD] TBQ score 61.8 [30.5] vs. 37.7 [27.5]; P < 0.0001). The treatment burden was higher for patients who had insufficient knowledge compared with those who had sufficient knowledge about their treatments (mean ± SD TBQ score 62.3 ± 31.3 vs. 47.8 ± 30.4; P < 0.0001) and conditions (63.0 ± 31.6 vs. 49.3 ± 30.7; P < 0.0001). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the retest (n = 282) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.82).

          Conclusions

          We found that the English TBQ is a reliable instrument in this population, and provide evidence supporting the construct validity for its use to assess treatment burden for patients with one or more chronic conditions in English-speaking countries.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence.

          Adherence to the medical regimen continues to rank as a major clinical problem in the management of patients with essential hypertension, as in other conditions treated with drugs and life-style modification. This article reviews the psychometric properties and tests the concurrent and predictive validity of a structured four-item self-reported adherence measure (alpha reliability = 0.61), which can be easily integrated into the medical visit. Items in the scale address barriers to medication-taking and permit the health care provider to reinforce positive adherence behaviors. Data on patient adherence to the medical regimen were collected at the end of a formalized 18-month educational program. Blood pressure measurements were recorded throughout a 3-year follow-up period. Results showed the scale to demonstrate both concurrent and predictive validity with regard to blood pressure control at 2 years and 5 years, respectively. Seventy-five percent of the patients who scored high on the four-item scale at year 2 had their blood pressure under adequate control at year 5, compared with 47% under control at year 5 for those patients scoring low (P less than 0.01).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.

            Agreement between two methods of clinical measurement can be quantified using the differences between observations made using the two methods on the same subjects. The 95% limits of agreement, estimated by mean difference +/- 1.96 standard deviation of the differences, provide an interval within which 95% of differences between measurements by the two methods are expected to lie. We describe how graphical methods can be used to investigate the assumptions of the method and we also give confidence intervals. We extend the basic approach to data where there is a relationship between difference and magnitude, both with a simple logarithmic transformation approach and a new, more general, regression approach. We discuss the importance of the repeatability of each method separately and compare an estimate of this to the limits of agreement. We extend the limits of agreement approach to data with repeated measurements, proposing new estimates for equal numbers of replicates by each method on each subject, for unequal numbers of replicates, and for replicated data collected in pairs, where the underlying value of the quantity being measured is changing. Finally, we describe a nonparametric approach to comparing methods.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predictive validity of a medication adherence measure in an outpatient setting.

              This study examines the psychometric properties and tests the concurrent and predictive validity of a structured, self-reported medication adherence measure in patients with hypertension. The authors also assessed various psychosocial determinants of adherence, such as knowledge, social support, satisfaction with care, and complexity of the medical regimen. A total of 1367 patients participated in the study; mean age was 52.5 years, 40.8% were male, 76.5% were black, 50.8% graduated from high school, 26% were married, and 54.1% had income <$5,000. The 8-item medication adherence scale was reliable (alpha=.83) and significantly associated with blood pressure control (P<.05). Using a cutpoint of <6, the sensitivity of the measure to identify patients with poor blood pressure control was estimated to be 93%, and the specificity was 53%. The medication adherence measure proved to be reliable, with good concurrent and predictive validity in primarily low-income, minority patients with hypertension and might function as a screening tool in outpatient settings with other patient groups.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMC Med
                BMC Med
                BMC Medicine
                BioMed Central
                1741-7015
                2014
                2 July 2014
                : 12
                : 109
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of General Medicine, Paris Diderot University, Paris, France
                [2 ]METHODS Team, Epidemiology and Statistics Sorbonne Paris Cité Research Centre, UMR 1153, INSERM, 1 place du Parvis Notre-Dame, Paris 75181, France
                [3 ]Centre d'Épidémiologie Clinique, HôpitalHôtel-Dieu, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
                [4 ]PatientsLikeMe, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
                [5 ]Division of Health Care and Policy Research, Department of Health Sciences Research and Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
                [6 ]Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
                [7 ]Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA
                Article
                1741-7015-12-109
                10.1186/1741-7015-12-109
                4098922
                24989988
                Copyright © 2014 Tran et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                Categories
                Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article