患者对治疗的定性评估--真实世界(PQAT-RW)的开发和内容验证:一种在真实世界环境中评估治疗利弊的工具。

IF 1.8 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Patient Related Outcome Measures Pub Date : 2024-10-07 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/PROM.S468623
Aude Roborel de Climens, Amy Findley, Denise P Bury, Keri J S Brady, Matthew Reaney, Adam Gater
{"title":"患者对治疗的定性评估--真实世界(PQAT-RW)的开发和内容验证:一种在真实世界环境中评估治疗利弊的工具。","authors":"Aude Roborel de Climens, Amy Findley, Denise P Bury, Keri J S Brady, Matthew Reaney, Adam Gater","doi":"10.2147/PROM.S468623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Quantifying patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages of treatments in a real-world setting is increasingly important in healthcare decision-making. The Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment (PQAT) assesses patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages of treatment, and associated trade-offs potentially influencing patients' willingness to continue treatment. It has then been modified to capture patients' perceived magnitude of benefits and disadvantages of treatment quantitatively, as well as qualitatively (PQATv2). However, the PQAT and the PQATv2 were designed for use and validated in a clinical trial setting. The objective of this study was to adapt and test the content validity of a version of the PQATv2 for use in real-world settings (PQAT-RW).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The PQATv2 was adapted for use in real-world settings (PQAT-RW), and its content was validated in 16 patients with varied chronic medical conditions and medication regimens via semi-structured qualitative interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All participants reported that the PQAT-RW was \"easy to understand\". The majority (n = 11/16) reported that the items covered all important aspects of their treatment experience, and that no items needed to be removed or added to the instrument. Analysis of free-text responses identified eight global concepts considered by participants when evaluating the benefits and disadvantages of treatment: treatment effectiveness, side effects and method of administration were most frequently considered (as both benefits and disadvantages), followed by frequency of administration, financial considerations, storage, packaging and drug preparation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study support the content validity of the PQAT-RW. They also demonstrate that using qualitative responses to contextualize quantitative responses provides unique insight into diverse and individualized patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages, and their relative importance, in real-world settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19747,"journal":{"name":"Patient Related Outcome Measures","volume":"15 ","pages":"255-269"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11468370/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and Content Validation of the Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment - Real-World (PQAT-RW): An Instrument to Evaluate Benefits and Disadvantages of Treatments in Real-World Settings.\",\"authors\":\"Aude Roborel de Climens, Amy Findley, Denise P Bury, Keri J S Brady, Matthew Reaney, Adam Gater\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/PROM.S468623\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Quantifying patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages of treatments in a real-world setting is increasingly important in healthcare decision-making. The Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment (PQAT) assesses patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages of treatment, and associated trade-offs potentially influencing patients' willingness to continue treatment. It has then been modified to capture patients' perceived magnitude of benefits and disadvantages of treatment quantitatively, as well as qualitatively (PQATv2). However, the PQAT and the PQATv2 were designed for use and validated in a clinical trial setting. The objective of this study was to adapt and test the content validity of a version of the PQATv2 for use in real-world settings (PQAT-RW).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The PQATv2 was adapted for use in real-world settings (PQAT-RW), and its content was validated in 16 patients with varied chronic medical conditions and medication regimens via semi-structured qualitative interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All participants reported that the PQAT-RW was \\\"easy to understand\\\". The majority (n = 11/16) reported that the items covered all important aspects of their treatment experience, and that no items needed to be removed or added to the instrument. Analysis of free-text responses identified eight global concepts considered by participants when evaluating the benefits and disadvantages of treatment: treatment effectiveness, side effects and method of administration were most frequently considered (as both benefits and disadvantages), followed by frequency of administration, financial considerations, storage, packaging and drug preparation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study support the content validity of the PQAT-RW. They also demonstrate that using qualitative responses to contextualize quantitative responses provides unique insight into diverse and individualized patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages, and their relative importance, in real-world settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient Related Outcome Measures\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"255-269\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11468370/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient Related Outcome Measures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S468623\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Related Outcome Measures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S468623","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在现实环境中量化患者感知到的治疗利弊在医疗决策中越来越重要。患者对治疗的定性评估(PQAT)可评估患者感知到的治疗利弊,以及可能影响患者继续治疗意愿的相关权衡。之后,对该方法进行了修改,以便从定量和定性两个方面了解患者对治疗利弊的感知程度(PQATv2)。然而,PQAT 和 PQATv2 是为在临床试验环境中使用和验证而设计的。本研究的目的是调整 PQATv2 的版本,并测试其在真实世界环境中使用的内容有效性(PQAT-RW):对 PQATv2 进行了改编,以便在现实环境中使用(PQAT-RW),并通过半结构化定性访谈对 16 名患有不同慢性疾病和用药方案的患者进行了内容验证:所有参与者都表示 PQAT-RW "易于理解"。大多数人(n = 11/16)表示,项目涵盖了他们治疗经历的所有重要方面,没有项目需要删除或添加到工具中。对自由文本回答的分析确定了参与者在评估治疗利弊时所考虑的八个总体概念:最常考虑的是治疗效果、副作用和给药方法(既是利也是弊),其次是给药频率、财务考虑、储存、包装和药物制备:本研究的结果证明了 PQAT-RW 的内容有效性。结论:本研究结果证明了 PQAT-RW 的内容有效性,同时也证明了使用定性回答将定量回答与实际情况相结合,可以让我们深入了解现实世界中患者认为的各种不同的个性化利弊及其相对重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development and Content Validation of the Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment - Real-World (PQAT-RW): An Instrument to Evaluate Benefits and Disadvantages of Treatments in Real-World Settings.

Purpose: Quantifying patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages of treatments in a real-world setting is increasingly important in healthcare decision-making. The Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment (PQAT) assesses patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages of treatment, and associated trade-offs potentially influencing patients' willingness to continue treatment. It has then been modified to capture patients' perceived magnitude of benefits and disadvantages of treatment quantitatively, as well as qualitatively (PQATv2). However, the PQAT and the PQATv2 were designed for use and validated in a clinical trial setting. The objective of this study was to adapt and test the content validity of a version of the PQATv2 for use in real-world settings (PQAT-RW).

Patients and methods: The PQATv2 was adapted for use in real-world settings (PQAT-RW), and its content was validated in 16 patients with varied chronic medical conditions and medication regimens via semi-structured qualitative interviews.

Results: All participants reported that the PQAT-RW was "easy to understand". The majority (n = 11/16) reported that the items covered all important aspects of their treatment experience, and that no items needed to be removed or added to the instrument. Analysis of free-text responses identified eight global concepts considered by participants when evaluating the benefits and disadvantages of treatment: treatment effectiveness, side effects and method of administration were most frequently considered (as both benefits and disadvantages), followed by frequency of administration, financial considerations, storage, packaging and drug preparation.

Conclusion: The results of this study support the content validity of the PQAT-RW. They also demonstrate that using qualitative responses to contextualize quantitative responses provides unique insight into diverse and individualized patient-perceived benefits and disadvantages, and their relative importance, in real-world settings.

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
Patient Related Outcome Measures
Patient Related Outcome Measures HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
自引率
4.80%
发文量
27
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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