Understanding the role of discriminative instruments in HRQoL research: can Ferguson's Delta help?

A critique of Hankins, M: How discriminating are discriminative instruments?" Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6:3

Observational longitudinal study of symptom burden and time for recovery from community-acquired pneumonia reported by older adults surveyed nationwide using the CAP Burden of Illness Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Millions of older adults who develop community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) each year survive, but there is a large knowledge gap on the burden of CAP and the recovery process in survivors from the patient perspective. METHODS: The newly developed CAP Burden of Illness Questionnaire was administered through a Web survey to a nationwide sample of US adults aged ≥50 years who were recently diagnosed with CAP. Survey respondents with unresolved symptoms or other CAP-related health problems completed a second survey 30 days later; a third survey was completed another 30 days later by respondents with unresolved symptoms or problems. Nationally representative results describing the average time to recovery of symptoms and other CAP-related problems were achieved using post-stratification weights. RESULTS: Five hundred participants completed the initial survey. The time to resolution for the CAP symptoms of weakness, shortness of breath, and tiredness exceeded 3 weeks on average. There was an average of 13 days of absenteeism, and 3 weeks (mean =21 days) before achieving full work/activity productivity after CAP. For participants with health conditions that worsened from pneumonia, chronic emphysema and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease took the longest to return to baseline (mean =60 and 52.4 days, respectively). CONCLUSION: The results from this study demonstrate that older adults surviving a CAP episode experience a significant multi-symptom illness with long recovery periods to achieve pre-CAP health and productivity. These findings highlight the need for further research on effective clinician-patient communication, the need for patient-centered outcomes in clinical trials for CAP therapeutics, adequate home care during the recovery process, and the pursuit of CAP prevention strategies

Physician-estimated disease severity in patients with chronic heart or lung disease: a cross-sectional analysis

BACKGROUND: We evaluated how well physicians' global estimates of disease severity correspond to more specific physician-rated disease variables as well as patients' self-rated health and other patient variables. METHODS: We analyzed baseline data from 1662 primary care patients with chronic cardiac or pulmonary disease who were enrolled in a longitudinal study of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Each patient's primary physician rated overall disease severity, estimated the two-year risk of hospitalization and mortality, and reported the use of disease-specific medications, tests, and subspecialty referrals. Patient variables included sociodemographic characteristics, psychosocial factors, self-rated health, and both generic and disease-specific HRQoL. RESULTS: Physicians rated 40% of their patients "about average", 30% "worse", and 30% "better" than the typical patient seen with the specific target disorder. The physician's global estimate of disease severity was strongly associated (P < 0.001) with each of the five more specific elements of physician-rated disease severity, but only marginally associated with patient self-rated health. Multivariable regression identified a set of patient variables that explained 16.4% of the variance in physician-rated disease severity. CONCLUSION: Physicians' global ratings may provide disease severity and prognostic information unique from and complementary to patient self-rated health and HRQoL measures. The elements influencing physician-rated disease severity and its predictive validity for clinical outcomes warrant prospective investigation

The Fatigue Associated with Depression Questionnaire (FAsD): responsiveness and responder definition

PURPOSE: The Fatigue Associated with Depression Questionnaire (FAsD) was developed to assess fatigue and its impact among patients with depression. The purpose of this study was to examine the questionnaire’s responsiveness to change and identify a responder definition for interpretation of treatment-related changes. METHODS: Data were collected at baseline and at 6 weeks from patients with depression starting treatment with a new antidepressant. RESULTS: Of the 96 participants, 55.2% were women, with a mean age of 43.4 years. The total score and both subscales demonstrated statistically significant change with moderate to large effect sizes (absolute values ≥0.76). FAsD change scores were significantly correlated with change on the Brief Fatigue Inventory (r ≥ 0.73; p < 0.001). FAsD mean change scores discriminated among patient subgroups differing by degree of improvement in patient- and clinician-reported fatigue and depression. Responder definition for the two subscales and total score (0.67, 0.57, 0.62) was estimated primarily based on mean change among patients who reported a small but important improvement in fatigue. DISCUSSION: The FAsD was responsive to change, and the responder definition may be used when interpreting treatment-related change. Results add to previous findings suggesting the FAsD is a useful measure of fatigue among patients with depression

Exploring content and psychometric validity of newly developed assessment tools for itch and skin pain in atopic dermatitis.

BackgroundAtopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin disorder characterized by chronic inflammation, altered skin barrier function, and inflammatory cell skin infiltration that decreases health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The study objective was to understand the patient perspective of AD burden and determine suitable patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures.MethodsThis mixed methods study involved the collection of qualitative and quantitative information from adults (≥ 18 years old) and adolescents (12 - 17 years old) with clinician-confirmed AD regarding their experiences of AD symptoms and its impact on HRQoL. The first part of the study included three stages: in-person concept elicitation (CE) interviews, a 2-week daily electronic diary (eDiary) study, and in-person cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews. An Itch numeric rating scale (NRS) (v1.0) and a Skin Pain NRS (v1.0) evaluation during CD interviews required participants to think about their 'worst' itch and 'worst' skin pain in the past 24 h. Other PRO measures allowed for psychometric testing. The second part of the study involved telephone-depth interviews (TDIs) and qualitative feedback from participants who had not participated in the CD interviews. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed. Psychometric evaluation of NRS measures was performed using eDiary data.ResultsIn the CE interviews, itch and/or itching and skin pain were the most prevalent symptoms consistently discussed by participants. Both NRS measures demonstrated strong psychometric reliability and were applicable across ages with suitable concurrent validity. During the CD interviews, some participants focused their answers on their 'average' itch/itching in the past 24 h, rather than their 'worst' itch. Some participants answered the Skin Pain NRS thinking about general pain or other types of pain, rather than skin pain specifically. Consequently, modifications to both measures addressed these issues and re-tested as paper-and-pen versions in subsequent TDIs. Itch NRS (v2.0) modifications helped participants focus on their worst itching. Most participants preferred Skin Pain NRS v2.0b, which included skin pain descriptors.ConclusionsItching and skin pain are the most important and relevant AD symptoms. The Itch NRS (v2.0) and Skin Pain NRS (v2.0b) appear to be appropriate endpoints for the assessment of itching and skin pain severity for clinical trials with adults and adolescents with AD

Reliability, Validity, and Interpretation of the Dependence Scale in Mild to Moderately Severe Alzheimer's Disease

INTRODUCTION: The Dependence Scale (DS) was designed to measure dependence on others among patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). The objectives of this research were primarily to strengthen the psychometric evidence for the use of the DS in AD studies. METHODS: Patients with mild to moderately severe AD were examined in 3 study databases. Within each data set, internal consistency, validity, and responsiveness were examined, and structural equation models were fit. RESULTS: The DS has strong psychometric properties. The DS scores differed significantly across known groups and demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with measures hypothesized to be related to dependence (|r| >/= .31). Structural equation modeling supported the validity of the DS concept. An anchor-based DS responder definition to interpret a treatment benefit over time was identified. DISCUSSION: The DS is a reliable, valid, and interpretable measure of dependence associated with AD and is shown to be related to--but provides information distinct from--cognition, functioning, and behavior

Meaningful Changes in What Matters to Individuals with Vitiligo: Content Validity and Meaningful Change Thresholds of the Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (VASI)

INTRODUCTION: This study explored patients\u27 and dermatologists\u27 priority outcomes for treatment to address, clinical outcome assessments (COA) for use in vitiligo clinical trials, and perceptions of within-patient meaningful change in facial and total body vitiligo. METHODS: Semistructured, individual, qualitative interviews were conducted with patients living with non-segmental vitiligo in the USA and with expert dermatologists in vitiligo. Concept elicitation discussions included open-ended questions to identify patient priority outcomes. Vitiligo COAs were reviewed by dermatologists. Tasks were completed by patients to explore their perceptions of meaningful changes in vitiligo outcomes; dermatologists\u27 opinions were elicited. Data were analyzed using thematic methods; meaningful change tasks were descriptively summarized. RESULTS: Individuals with vitiligo (N = 60) included adults (n = 48, 63% female) and adolescents (n = 12, 67% female). All Fitzpatrick Skin Types were represented. Eight (13%) were first- or second-generation immigrants to the USA. Expert dermatologists (N = 14) participated from the USA (n = 8), EU (n = 4), India (n = 1), and Egypt (n = 1). All individuals with vitiligo reported experiencing skin depigmentation; an observable clinical sign of vitiligo. Most confirmed that lesion surface area (n = 59/60, 98%) and level of pigmentation (n = 53/60, 88%) were important to include in disease assessments. Following an explanation, participants (n = 49/60, 82%) felt that the Facial Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (F-VASI) measurement generally made sense and understood that doctors would use it to assess facial vitiligo. Most participants felt that a 75% (n = 47/59, 80%) or 9 0% improvement in their facial vitiligo would be indicative of treatment success (n = 55/59, 93%). In the context of evaluating a systemic oral treatment for vitiligo, dermatologists perceived a 75% improvement on the F-VASI as successful (n = 9/14, 64%). Regarding the Total VASI (T-VASI) score, n = 30 participants considered 33% improvement as treatment success; an additional n = 10 endorsed 50% improvement and a further n = 5 endorsed 75% improvement. Clinicians most frequently identified 50% (n = 6/14, 43%) or 75% (n = 4/14, 29%) improvement in T-VASI as successful. CONCLUSION: Repigmentation is a priority outcome for patients. The VASI was considered an appropriate tool to assess the extent of vitiligo. A minimum 75% improvement from baseline in the F-VASI and minimum 50% improvement from baseline in the T-VASI were identified as within-patient clinically meaningful thresholds

Measuring Patient and Clinician Perspectives to Evaluate Change in Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

CONTEXT: Many treatments aim to improve patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and many care guidelines suggest assessing symptoms and their impact on HRQoL. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding which HRQoL outcome measures are appropriate to assess, and how much change on those measures depict significant HRQoL improvement. OBJECTIVE: We used triangulation methods to identify and understand clinically important differences (CIDs) for the amount of change in HRQoL that reflects both health professionals and patients’ values, among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We incorporated three perspectives: (1) an expert panel of physicians familiar with the measurement of HRQoL in COPD patients; (2) 610 primary care COPD outpatients who completed baseline and bimonthly follow-up HRQoL interviews over the 12-month study; and (3) the primary care physicians (PCPs; n = 43) of these outpatients who assessed their patients’ disease at baseline and at subsequent PCP visits during the year long study. MEASUREMENTS: The Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item survey (SF-36, version 2.0), and global assessments of change from each of the three perspectives for all HRQoL domains. RESULTS: With few exceptions, the CRQ was able to detect small changes at levels reported by the patients (1–2 points) and their PCPs (1–5 points). These results confirm minimal important difference standards developed in 1989 by Jaeschke et al. anchored on patient-perceived changes in HRQoL. In general, the expert panel and PCP CIDs were larger than the patient CIDs. CONCLUSION: This triangulation methodology yielded improved interpretation, understanding, and insights on stakeholder perspectives of CIDs for patient-reported outcomes