Psychometrics of a new questionnaire to assess glaucoma adherence: the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis).

Steven L Mansberger, Christina R Sheppler, Tina M McClure, Cory L Vanalstine, Ingrid L Swanson, Zoey Stoumbos, William E Lambert
{"title":"Psychometrics of a new questionnaire to assess glaucoma adherence: the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis).","authors":"Steven L Mansberger,&nbsp;Christina R Sheppler,&nbsp;Tina M McClure,&nbsp;Cory L Vanalstine,&nbsp;Ingrid L Swanson,&nbsp;Zoey Stoumbos,&nbsp;William E Lambert","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To report the psychometrics of the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool (GTCAT), a new questionnaire designed to assess adherence with glaucoma therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed the questionnaire according to the constructs of the Health Belief Model. We evaluated the questionnaire using data from a cross-sectional study with focus groups (n = 20) and a prospective observational case series (n=58). Principal components analysis provided assessment of construct validity. We repeated the questionnaire after 3 months for test-retest reliability. We evaluated predictive validity using an electronic dosing monitor as an objective measure of adherence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Focus group participants provided 931 statements related to adherence, of which 88.7% (826/931) could be categorized into the constructs of the Health Belief Model. Perceived barriers accounted for 31% (288/931) of statements, cues-to-action 14% (131/931), susceptibility 12% (116/931), benefits 12% (115/931), severity 10% (91/931), and self-efficacy 9% (85/931). The principal components analysis explained 77% of the variance with five components representing Health Belief Model constructs. Reliability analyses showed acceptable Cronbach's alphas (>.70) for four of the seven components (severity, susceptibility, barriers [eye drop administration], and barriers [discomfort]). Predictive validity was high, with several Health Belief Model questions significantly associated (P <.05) with adherence and a correlation coefficient (R (2)) of .40. Test-retest reliability was 90%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The GTCAT shows excellent repeatability, content, construct, and predictive validity for glaucoma adherence. A multisite trial is needed to determine whether the results can be generalized and whether the questionnaire accurately measures the effect of interventions to increase adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":23166,"journal":{"name":"Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3783251/pdf/1545-6110_v111_p001.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To report the psychometrics of the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool (GTCAT), a new questionnaire designed to assess adherence with glaucoma therapy.

Methods: We developed the questionnaire according to the constructs of the Health Belief Model. We evaluated the questionnaire using data from a cross-sectional study with focus groups (n = 20) and a prospective observational case series (n=58). Principal components analysis provided assessment of construct validity. We repeated the questionnaire after 3 months for test-retest reliability. We evaluated predictive validity using an electronic dosing monitor as an objective measure of adherence.

Results: Focus group participants provided 931 statements related to adherence, of which 88.7% (826/931) could be categorized into the constructs of the Health Belief Model. Perceived barriers accounted for 31% (288/931) of statements, cues-to-action 14% (131/931), susceptibility 12% (116/931), benefits 12% (115/931), severity 10% (91/931), and self-efficacy 9% (85/931). The principal components analysis explained 77% of the variance with five components representing Health Belief Model constructs. Reliability analyses showed acceptable Cronbach's alphas (>.70) for four of the seven components (severity, susceptibility, barriers [eye drop administration], and barriers [discomfort]). Predictive validity was high, with several Health Belief Model questions significantly associated (P <.05) with adherence and a correlation coefficient (R (2)) of .40. Test-retest reliability was 90%.

Conclusion: The GTCAT shows excellent repeatability, content, construct, and predictive validity for glaucoma adherence. A multisite trial is needed to determine whether the results can be generalized and whether the questionnaire accurately measures the effect of interventions to increase adherence.

评估青光眼依从性的新问卷的心理测量学:青光眼治疗依从性评估工具(美国眼科学会论文)。
目的:报告青光眼治疗依从性评估工具(GTCAT)的心理测量学,这是一项旨在评估青光眼治疗依从性的新问卷。方法:根据健康信念模型的构建,编制问卷。我们使用来自焦点小组(n= 20)和前瞻性观察病例系列(n=58)的横断面研究数据对问卷进行评估。主成分分析提供构念效度评估。我们在3个月后对问卷进行重测信度测试。我们使用电子剂量监测器作为依从性的客观测量来评估预测效度。结果:焦点小组参与者提供了931个与依从性相关的陈述,其中88.7%(826/931)可以被分类到健康信念模型的构念中。感知障碍占陈述的31%(288/931),提示行动占14%(131/931),易感性占12%(116/931),获益占12%(115/931),严重性占10%(91/931),自我效能占9%(85/931)。主成分分析解释了77%的方差,其中五个成分代表健康信念模型结构。信度分析显示,七个成分(严重程度、易感性、障碍(滴眼液)和障碍(不适))中有四个的Cronbach's alpha值可接受(>.70)。结论:GTCAT对青光眼依从性具有良好的可重复性、内容、结构和预测效度。需要多地点试验来确定结果是否可以推广,以及问卷是否准确地衡量干预措施对增加依从性的影响。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信