Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2005
The validation of patient-rated global assessments of treatment benefit, satisfaction, and willingness to continue--the BSW.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pleil Andreas M, Coyne Karen S, Reese Pat Ray, Jumadilova Zhanna, Rovner Eric S, Kelleher Con J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the validity of three single-item, patient-rated, interviewer-administered, global assessments of treatment benefit, satisfaction with treatment and willingness to continue treatment, collectively referred to as the BSW.
METHODS: The BSW, micturition diaries, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) and the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) were included in part or in total in three OAB clinical trials. Discriminant validity for full and dichotomized responses was assessed with anovas models and correlations were used to evaluate construct validity.
RESULTS: The BSW demonstrated significant differences among the majority of the response levels on all measures of micturitions in all studies. The BSW also demonstrated discriminant validity with the OAB-q and the KHQ. BSW measures demonstrated significant differences among the change scores for all subscales of the OAB-q and the majority of the KHQ domains with both full and dichotomized responses. Patients who were dissatisfied with treatment and those unwilling to continue treatment also reported significantly worse OAB-q and KHQ scores compared with those who were satisfied with treatment or willing to continue treatment. BSW measures were moderately correlated with the micturition variables, moderate to strongly correlated with the OAB-q and weak to moderately with the KHQ, providing support for the construct validity of the BSW measures.
CONCLUSIONS: The BSW is a useful tool to capture patients' global impressions of three key elements of treatment outcome: a perceived benefit, satisfaction with treatment, and the willingness to continue treatment, and can facilitate patient-physician communication as well as be informative to researchers.
METHODS: The BSW, micturition diaries, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) and the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) were included in part or in total in three OAB clinical trials. Discriminant validity for full and dichotomized responses was assessed with anovas models and correlations were used to evaluate construct validity.
RESULTS: The BSW demonstrated significant differences among the majority of the response levels on all measures of micturitions in all studies. The BSW also demonstrated discriminant validity with the OAB-q and the KHQ. BSW measures demonstrated significant differences among the change scores for all subscales of the OAB-q and the majority of the KHQ domains with both full and dichotomized responses. Patients who were dissatisfied with treatment and those unwilling to continue treatment also reported significantly worse OAB-q and KHQ scores compared with those who were satisfied with treatment or willing to continue treatment. BSW measures were moderately correlated with the micturition variables, moderate to strongly correlated with the OAB-q and weak to moderately with the KHQ, providing support for the construct validity of the BSW measures.
CONCLUSIONS: The BSW is a useful tool to capture patients' global impressions of three key elements of treatment outcome: a perceived benefit, satisfaction with treatment, and the willingness to continue treatment, and can facilitate patient-physician communication as well as be informative to researchers.