慢性阻塞性肺病患者起效问卷验证

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Charlie Strange, Barry J Make, Frank J Trudo, Gale Harding, Danielle Rodriguez, James M Eudicone, Norbert Feigler, Hitesh N Gandhi
{"title":"慢性阻塞性肺病患者起效问卷验证","authors":"Charlie Strange, Barry J Make, Frank J Trudo, Gale Harding, Danielle Rodriguez, James M Eudicone, Norbert Feigler, Hitesh N Gandhi","doi":"10.15326/jcopdf.2023.0485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient perception of medication onset of effect is important for adherence. Although the Onset of Effect Questionnaire (OEQ) has been validated in patients with asthma, it has not been evaluated in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated the COPD-OEQ in patients with COPD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two analyses (qualitative and quantitative) were conducted to assess the content validity and psychometric properties of the COPD-OEQ in participants with COPD. In the qualitative analysis, interviews assessed content validity by concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive interviewing (CI). CE included questions to understand patient experience related to onset of medication effect. CI included completion of the COPD-OEQ and assessment of the COPD-OEQ items, response options, and instructions. During the 2-week quantitative analysis, 2 versions of the COPD-OEQ (Weekly and Daily) were administered to assess test-retest reliability, construct validity, and known-groups validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The qualitative analysis demonstrated that 3 of the 5 COPD-OEQ items were relevant and understood as intended. Qualitative findings demonstrated inconsistent evidence that the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily were reliable and valid measures in participants with COPD. Test-retest reliability was observed for the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily; however, construct validitywas weak and demonstrated inconsistent correlations among COPD-OEQ items. Overall, known-groups validity was not demonstrated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The weak evidence from the quantitative analysis of the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily tools does not support use of the OEQ in general COPD. The study supports the content validity for the assessment of perceived onset of effect in patients with COPD.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11363968/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Onset of Effect Questionnaire in Participants With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Charlie Strange, Barry J Make, Frank J Trudo, Gale Harding, Danielle Rodriguez, James M Eudicone, Norbert Feigler, Hitesh N Gandhi\",\"doi\":\"10.15326/jcopdf.2023.0485\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient perception of medication onset of effect is important for adherence. Although the Onset of Effect Questionnaire (OEQ) has been validated in patients with asthma, it has not been evaluated in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated the COPD-OEQ in patients with COPD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two analyses (qualitative and quantitative) were conducted to assess the content validity and psychometric properties of the COPD-OEQ in participants with COPD. In the qualitative analysis, interviews assessed content validity by concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive interviewing (CI). CE included questions to understand patient experience related to onset of medication effect. CI included completion of the COPD-OEQ and assessment of the COPD-OEQ items, response options, and instructions. During the 2-week quantitative analysis, 2 versions of the COPD-OEQ (Weekly and Daily) were administered to assess test-retest reliability, construct validity, and known-groups validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The qualitative analysis demonstrated that 3 of the 5 COPD-OEQ items were relevant and understood as intended. Qualitative findings demonstrated inconsistent evidence that the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily were reliable and valid measures in participants with COPD. Test-retest reliability was observed for the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily; however, construct validitywas weak and demonstrated inconsistent correlations among COPD-OEQ items. Overall, known-groups validity was not demonstrated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The weak evidence from the quantitative analysis of the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily tools does not support use of the OEQ in general COPD. The study supports the content validity for the assessment of perceived onset of effect in patients with COPD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11363968/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15326/jcopdf.2023.0485\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15326/jcopdf.2023.0485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:患者对药物起效时间的感知对坚持用药非常重要。虽然起效问卷(OEQ)已在哮喘患者中得到验证,但尚未在慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)患者中进行评估。本研究对 COPD 患者的 COPD-OEQ 进行了评估:为了评估 COPD-OEQ 在 COPD 患者中的内容效度和心理测量特性,我们进行了两项分析(定性和定量)。在定性分析中,访谈通过概念激发(CE)和认知访谈(CI)评估内容有效性。概念激发包括一些问题,以了解患者与药物起效相关的经历。认知访谈包括完成 COPD-OEQ 以及评估 COPD-OEQ 项目、回答选项和说明。在为期两周的定量分析过程中,对两个版本的 COPD-OEQ (每周和每日)进行了测试,以评估重测可靠性、结构效度和已知组效度:定性分析结果表明,在 5 个 COPD-OEQ 项目中,有 3 个项目具有相关性,并能被理解。定性分析结果表明,有不一致的证据表明 COPD-OEQ 每周和每日问卷对 COPD 患者是可靠有效的测量方法。COPD-OEQ 每周问卷和每日问卷的重测可靠性得到了观察;但是,COPD-OEQ 各项目之间的相关性不一致,其结构效度较弱。总体而言,未显示出已知组的有效性:COPD-OEQ 每周和每日工具的定量分析证据不足,不支持将 OEQ 用于普通 COPD。该研究支持对慢性阻塞性肺病患者的起效感知进行内容效度评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validation of the Onset of Effect Questionnaire in Participants With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Background: Patient perception of medication onset of effect is important for adherence. Although the Onset of Effect Questionnaire (OEQ) has been validated in patients with asthma, it has not been evaluated in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study evaluated the COPD-OEQ in patients with COPD.

Methods: Two analyses (qualitative and quantitative) were conducted to assess the content validity and psychometric properties of the COPD-OEQ in participants with COPD. In the qualitative analysis, interviews assessed content validity by concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive interviewing (CI). CE included questions to understand patient experience related to onset of medication effect. CI included completion of the COPD-OEQ and assessment of the COPD-OEQ items, response options, and instructions. During the 2-week quantitative analysis, 2 versions of the COPD-OEQ (Weekly and Daily) were administered to assess test-retest reliability, construct validity, and known-groups validity.

Results: The qualitative analysis demonstrated that 3 of the 5 COPD-OEQ items were relevant and understood as intended. Qualitative findings demonstrated inconsistent evidence that the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily were reliable and valid measures in participants with COPD. Test-retest reliability was observed for the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily; however, construct validitywas weak and demonstrated inconsistent correlations among COPD-OEQ items. Overall, known-groups validity was not demonstrated.

Conclusion: The weak evidence from the quantitative analysis of the COPD-OEQ Weekly and Daily tools does not support use of the OEQ in general COPD. The study supports the content validity for the assessment of perceived onset of effect in patients with COPD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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