Assessment of treatment expectations in people with suspected endometriosis: A psychometric analysis.

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics

F1000Research Pub Date : 2024-09-09 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.12688/f1000research.145377.2

Ann-Katrin Meyrose, Lukas A Basedow, Nina Hirsing, Olaf Buchweitz, Winfried Rief, Yvonne Nestoriuc

{"title":"Assessment of treatment expectations in people with suspected endometriosis: A psychometric analysis.","authors":"Ann-Katrin Meyrose, Lukas A Basedow, Nina Hirsing, Olaf Buchweitz, Winfried Rief, Yvonne Nestoriuc","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.145377.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Treatment expectations influence clinical outcomes in various physical and psychological conditions; however, no studies have explored their role in endometriosis treatment. It is necessary to understand how these expectations can be measured to study treatment expectations and their effects in clinical practice. This study aimed to psychometrically analyze and compare different treatment expectation measurements and describe treatment expectations in women with suspected endometriosis.Method: Analysis of cross-sectional baseline data of a mixed-method clinical observational study of N=699 patients undergoing laparoscopy in Germany. Descriptives, bivariate associations, convergent and discriminant validity of four expectation measurements (Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q); Generic rating scale for previous treatment experiences, treatment expectations, and treatment effects (GEEE); numerical rating scales (NRS) assessing improvement and worsening of endometriosis symptoms, expected Pain Disability Index (PDI); range: 0 to 10) were estimated. A cluster analysis was performed on the three GEEE items.Results: Most participants expected high improvement ( M=6.68 to 7.20, SD=1.90 to 2.09) and low worsening ( M=1.09 to 2.52, SD=1.80 to 2.25) of disability from laparoscopy. Participants who expected greater worsening expected more side effects ( r=.31 to .60, p<.001). Associations between the positive and negative expectation dimensions, including side effects, were small to non-significant ( r =|.24| to .00, p<.001 to.978). Four distinct clusters, described as'positive', 'no pain, no gain', 'diminished', and 'uniform' were found, with a total PVE of 62.2%.Conclusions: Women with suspected endometriosis reported positive expectations concerning laparoscopy, but wide ranges indicated interindividual differences. Treatment expectations seem to be a multidimensional construct in this patient group. The investigated measurements did not correlate to the extent that they measured exactly the same construct. The selection of measurements should be carefully considered and adapted for the study purposes. Clusters provide initial indications for individualized interventions that target expectation manipulation.Trial registration number: ID NCT05019612 ( ClinicalTrials.gov).","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"13 ","pages":"174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11425038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.145377.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Treatment expectations influence clinical outcomes in various physical and psychological conditions; however, no studies have explored their role in endometriosis treatment. It is necessary to understand how these expectations can be measured to study treatment expectations and their effects in clinical practice. This study aimed to psychometrically analyze and compare different treatment expectation measurements and describe treatment expectations in women with suspected endometriosis.

Method: Analysis of cross-sectional baseline data of a mixed-method clinical observational study of N=699 patients undergoing laparoscopy in Germany. Descriptives, bivariate associations, convergent and discriminant validity of four expectation measurements (Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q); Generic rating scale for previous treatment experiences, treatment expectations, and treatment effects (GEEE); numerical rating scales (NRS) assessing improvement and worsening of endometriosis symptoms, expected Pain Disability Index (PDI); range: 0 to 10) were estimated. A cluster analysis was performed on the three GEEE items.

Results: Most participants expected high improvement ( M=6.68 to 7.20, SD=1.90 to 2.09) and low worsening ( M=1.09 to 2.52, SD=1.80 to 2.25) of disability from laparoscopy. Participants who expected greater worsening expected more side effects ( r=.31 to .60, p<.001). Associations between the positive and negative expectation dimensions, including side effects, were small to non-significant ( r =|.24| to .00, p<.001 to.978). Four distinct clusters, described as'positive', 'no pain, no gain', 'diminished', and 'uniform' were found, with a total PVE of 62.2%.

Conclusions: Women with suspected endometriosis reported positive expectations concerning laparoscopy, but wide ranges indicated interindividual differences. Treatment expectations seem to be a multidimensional construct in this patient group. The investigated measurements did not correlate to the extent that they measured exactly the same construct. The selection of measurements should be carefully considered and adapted for the study purposes. Clusters provide initial indications for individualized interventions that target expectation manipulation.

Trial registration number: ID NCT05019612 ( ClinicalTrials.gov).

查看原文本刊更多论文

对疑似子宫内膜异位症患者治疗期望的评估：心理测量分析。

背景：治疗期望会影响各种生理和心理疾病的临床结果，但目前还没有研究探讨过治疗期望在子宫内膜异位症治疗中的作用。有必要了解如何测量这些期望，以研究治疗期望及其在临床实践中的影响。本研究旨在对不同的治疗期望测量方法进行心理分析和比较，并描述疑似子宫内膜异位症妇女的治疗期望：方法：分析一项混合方法临床观察研究的横断面基线数据，研究对象为在德国接受腹腔镜检查的 699 名患者。对四种预期测量（治疗预期问卷（TEX-Q）；既往治疗经验、治疗预期和治疗效果通用评分量表（GEEE）；评估子宫内膜异位症症状改善和恶化的数字评分量表（NRS）；预期疼痛残疾指数（PDI）；范围从 0 到 10）的描述性、双变量关联、收敛性和区分性有效性进行了估算：0至10）进行了估算。对 GEEE 的三个项目进行了聚类分析：结果：大多数参与者预计腹腔镜手术后的残疾程度会有较大改善（M=6.68 至 7.20，SD=1.90 至 2.09）和较小恶化（M=1.09 至 2.52，SD=1.80 至 2.25）。预期恶化程度较高的参与者预期副作用较多（r=.31 至 .60，pr =|.24| 至 .00，p结论：怀疑患有子宫内膜异位症的妇女对腹腔镜检查抱有积极的期望，但个体间的差异很大。在这一患者群体中，治疗期望似乎是一个多维结构。所调查的测量结果并不完全相同。在选择测量方法时应仔细考虑，并根据研究目的进行调整。试验注册号：ID NCT05019612（ClinicalTrials.gov）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

F1000Research Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

1646

审稿时长

1 weeks

期刊介绍： F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.