Validation of the bowel urgency numeric rating scale in patients with Crohn's disease: results from a mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Bowel urgency (BU) is an important symptom of Crohn's disease (CD), however there is no patient-reported outcome (PRO) scale validated in this population to assess BU severity. Here we evaluated the content validity and psychometric properties of the Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). METHOD: Qualitative interviews were conducted with moderate-to-severe CD participants to confirm importance and relevance of BU in this population, cognitively debrief the Urgency NRS, and explore score interpretation and CD remission. A quantitative web survey study was conducted to explore the measurement properties of the urgency NRS. RESULTS: Qualitative Interview: 34 of 35 participants reported BU. It was most bothersome for 44%, 47% reported it daily, 18% with every bowel movement. BU had a severe impact on daily activities, causing many participants to stay home more than preferred. Patients confirmed the relevance, appropriateness, comprehensibility of the item, recall period, response options, and instructions of the Urgency NRS. Small reductions on the Urgency NRS score reflected meaningful improvements. Quantitative survey: The study sample comprised 76 participants (65.8% female). Mean Urgency NRS score was 4.7 (SD 2.26; N = 76) at Week 1, with no floor/ceiling effect. Test-retest reliability was acceptable. Construct and known-groups validity against selected PROs were overall strong and within ranges hypothesized a priori. CONCLUSION: The Urgency NRS is a valid and reliable instrument to assess BU severity in CD.

Experience and measurement of fatigue in adults with Crohn's disease: results from qualitative interviews and a longitudinal 2-week daily diary pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue has a detrimental impact on health-related quality of life and functioning in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). We aimed to confirm the relevance and importance of fatigue, establish the content validity of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), qualitatively explore meaningful change in fatigue experience, and assess the measurement properties of the FACIT-F in patients with moderate-to-severe CD. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods observational study consisting of a cross-sectional qualitative interview (Part A) and a longitudinal 2-week daily diary pilot study (Part B) in participants aged ≥ 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of moderate-to-severe CD. Part A included open-ended questions related to the participant's overall experiences with CD, fatigue, and impact on daily activities and a cognitive debriefing of several patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the FACIT-F. Part B consisted of participants completing an electronic daily diary that included the FACIT-F and other PROs for 14 days. Item performance, test-retest reliability, and construct validity were assessed at baseline (Day 1), Day 7, and Day 14. RESULTS: Thirty-five participants (mean age 45.1 years; 65.7% female) completed an interview (Part A). Ninety-one percent of the interview participants reported fatigue as a symptom attributed to CD. Participants indicated that fatigue had a major impact on their daily activities (e.g., recreation/ hobbies, work/school, yard work and housework), social activities, and emotional health. The FACIT-F was well understood by the interview participants. Seventy-six participants (mean age 41.9 years; 66% female) completed at least the Day 1 diary entry (Part B). Potential floor and ceiling effects were observed for several FACIT-F items, but test-retest reliability and construct validity were all strong and within the ranges hypothesized a priori. CONCLUSIONS: The interviews indicate that fatigue is a frequent and bothersome symptom experienced by most patients with moderate-to-severe CD and support the content validity of the FACIT-F in this population. Daily diary study results indicate that the FACIT-F scale demonstrates adequate reliability and validity among patients with CD. These study findings suggest that the FACIT-F would be a reliable, valid, and useful measure of fatigue in patients with moderate-to-severe CD.

Qualitative Interviews to Assess the Content Validity and Usability of the Electronic Raynaud Diary in Patients with Systemic Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the symptoms and impacts of Raynaud phenomenon (RP) in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) and to evaluate the content validity and usability of a new electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure for RP: the Raynaud Diary. METHODS: The Raynaud Diary was developed as a daily eDiary for assessing the number and duration of symptomatic Raynaud attacks; worst pain, numbness, tingling, and discomfort in the fingers; and overall disease severity, captured using the Raynaud's Condition Score. The Raynaud Diary was debriefed in two waves of qualitative interviews with adults with self-reported RP secondary to SSc. All interviews included open-ended questions about participants' experiences of RP. RESULTS: Participants (N = 39) had a mean age of 55.1 years, and 87% were female. Frequently reported RP symptoms were color change (reported by all participants), numbness (90%), tingling (82%), pain (77%), and discomfort (72%). Common attack triggers included temperature-related factors and stress. Participants reported being unable to be outside or do outdoor activities and had problems gripping objects. All participants demonstrated understanding of the Raynaud Diary instructions. Most participants indicated that they would be able to use the Raynaud Diary to record the worst severity of individual RP symptoms in the previous 24 hours. CONCLUSION: Patients with RP secondary to SSc bear a heavy symptom burden. The Raynaud Diary is a content valid PRO measure that captures the most frequent symptoms of RP in patients with SSc.

Psychometric evaluation of the Urgency NRS as a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: The Urgency Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) was developed as a content-valid single-item patient-reported outcome measure to assess severity of bowel urgency. Here, we evaluated the psychometric properties of the Urgency NRS. METHODS: Data were from a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (NCT03518086). Patients completed the Urgency NRS using a daily electronic diary, from which weekly average Urgency NRS scores were calculated. Test-retest reliability, known-groups validity, construct validity, responsiveness, and score interpretation were assessed using the modified Mayo score, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), Patient Global Rating of Severity (PGRS), Patient Global Rating of Change (PGRC), and Geboes score. RESULTS: The study sample comprised 1,162 participants (40.2% female). Mean Urgency NRS score was higher (worse) at baseline than at week 12 (6.2 vs. 3.7). Test-retest reliability was strong, with intra-class correlation coefficients of 0.76-0.89. Baseline least-square mean Urgency NRS score was higher for participants with a PGRS score greater than the median (worse symptoms) than for those with a PGRS score less than or equal to the median (7.5 vs. 5.4; p < 0.0001), indicating good known-groups validity. Urgency NRS score was moderately correlated with IBDQ total and domain scores, PGRS, PGRC, and modified Mayo stool frequency, establishing its convergent validity. Correlations were weak for Geboes score and weak to moderate for modified Mayo endoscopic subscore and modified Mayo rectal bleeding, indicating that the Urgency NRS also had discriminant validity. Patients achieving clinical remission, clinical response, IBDQ remission, and PGRS score improvement showed significantly greater improvement on the Urgency NRS (p < 0.0001 for all), demonstrating responsiveness to change. A ≥ 3-point improvement in Urgency NRS score represented a meaningful improvement in bowel urgency and an Urgency NRS score of ≤ 1 point represented a bowel urgency remission threshold that was closely associated with clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission. CONCLUSIONS: The Urgency NRS is a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measure that is suitable for evaluating treatment benefits in clinical trials in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis.

Perspectives of healthcare providers on implementation of long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine in US healthcare settings from a Hybrid III Implementation-effectiveness study (CUSTOMIZE).

INTRODUCTION: CUSTOMIZE evaluated the implementation of long-acting (LA) cabotegravir + rilpivirine, a novel healthcare provider-administered injectable antiretroviral therapy regimen, in diverse US healthcare settings. Findings from staff-study participants (SSPs) through 12 months of implementation are reported. METHODS: CUSTOMIZE was a phase IIIb, 12-month, single-arm, hybrid III implementation-effectiveness study conducted from July 2019 to October 2020 at eight US clinics of five clinic types: private practice (n = 2), federally qualified health centre (n = 2), university (n = 2), AIDS Healthcare Foundation (n = 2) and health maintenance organization (n = 1). Eligible patient participants received monthly cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA injections after a 1-month oral lead-in. At baseline, month 4 and month 12, SSPs (n = 3 each per clinic), including physicians, nurses or injectors, and administrators, completed quantitative surveys and semi-structured interviews to assess implementation outcomes (acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of intervention measures), programme sustainability and SSP perceptions of, attitudes towards, and expectations for cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA. Month 12 data collection occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In surveys, SSPs reported high mean total scores for acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA implementation at baseline (4.43, 4.52 and 4.38 of 5, respectively) and month 12 (4.45, 4.61 and 4.46 of 5, respectively), regardless of clinic type. At month 12, SSPs were positive about the implementation sustainability (mean Program Sustainability Assessment Tool score, 5.83 out of 7). At baseline, SSPs' top concern was patients' ability to maintain monthly appointments (81%); at month 12, 39% had this concern. The proportion of SSPs reporting patient injection pain or soreness as a barrier was consistent at month 12 versus baseline (48% vs. 46%). Most (78%) SSPs reported optimal implementation of cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA in their clinics was achieved in 1-3 months. In interviews, SSP-reported strategies for successful implementation included teamwork, using a web-based treatment planner and having a designated person to track appointment scheduling. In month 12 interviews, SSP-reported structural changes needed for implementation included changing clinic hours and purchasing refrigerators. CONCLUSIONS: In CUSTOMIZE, cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA was successfully implemented across a range of US healthcare settings. Barriers were mitigated with minor process adjustments.

Perspectives of people living with HIV-1 on implementation of long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine in US healthcare settings: results from the CUSTOMIZE hybrid III implementation-effectiveness study.

INTRODUCTION: The CUSTOMIZE hybrid III implementation-effectiveness study evaluated implementation of once-monthly long-acting (LA) cabotegravir + rilpivirine in diverse US healthcare settings. Here, we report patient participant perspectives after 12 months in CUSTOMIZE. METHODS: CUSTOMIZE was a phase IIIb, 12-month study conducted from July 2019 to October 2020 at eight diverse US HIV clinics that enrolled virologically suppressed people living with HIV-1 (PLHIV) on a stable oral regimen to receive monthly cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA injections after a 1-month oral lead-in. Participants were administered quantitative surveys before injections at months 1 (baseline), 4 and 12. A randomly selected subset of participants was interviewed at baseline and month 12. Data collection at month 12 was completed by October 2020 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). RESULTS: At baseline, 109 and 34 participants completed surveys and interviews, respectively; 87% were male; 35% were Black or African American. All participants who remained in the study at month 12 (n = 102) maintained HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml; two participants withdrew due to injection-related reasons. Mean total scores measuring acceptability and appropriateness of cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA were high at baseline (4.5-4.6 out of 5) and month 12 (4.7-4.9). At month 12, 74% of participants reported nothing interfered with receiving LA injections; injection pain or soreness was the most common concern (15%). Time spent in the clinic and coming to the clinic for monthly injections was very or extremely acceptable after 12 months for most participants (93% and 87%, respectively), with 64% reporting having spent ≤30 minutes in the clinic for injection visits. At month 12, 92% of participants preferred LA injections to daily oral tablets (3%); 97% plan to continue LA treatment going forward. In month 12 interviews, 24 (77%) of 31 participants reported the COVID-19 pandemic did not impact their ability to receive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Once-monthly cabotegravir + rilpivirine LA was highly acceptable among PLHIV who were virologically suppressed on a stable antiretroviral regimen and interested in trying LA therapy, with few participants reporting challenges receiving LA injections. Implementation data from CUSTOMIZE suggest that monthly LA injections provide a convenient and appealing treatment option for PLHIV.

Symptoms, impacts, and suitability of the Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Symptoms and Impact (PAH-SYMPACT™) questionnaire in patients with sarcoidosis-associated pulmonary hypertension (SAPH): a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis-associated pulmonary hypertension (SAPH) is a prevalent and serious complication of sarcoidosis. No SAPH-specific self-report instruments for assessing SAPH symptoms and their impact on patients are available to date. This study sought to determine whether the Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Symptoms and Impact (PAH-SYMPACT™) questionnaire is suitable for use in patients with SAPH. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with SAPH participated in qualitative one-on-one telephone interviews to better understand SAPH symptoms and their impacts on patients' lives and to determine the appropriateness of the PAH-SYMPACT™ for use in patients with SAPH. The interviews comprised concept elicitation, completion of the PAH-SYMPACT™, and cognitive debriefing. Interview transcripts were analyzed by content analysis. RESULTS: Eleven patients with SAPH were interviewed between August 2019 and June 2020. In the concept elicitation, all 11 participants endorsed shortness of breath and nine participants (82%) rated it as their "most bothersome or severe" symptom. Impacts endorsed by all 11 participants were difficulty walking uphill or up stairs and difficulty in performing daily activities. Cognitive debriefing indicated that the PAH-SYMPACT™ items were relevant and understandable to most participants and reflected their experiences of SAPH. Participants indicated that no key symptoms or impacts of SAPH were missing. They also reported that the PAH-SYMPACT™ instructions and response options were clear, and that it would be feasible to complete the 11 symptom items and one oxygen use item as part of their daily schedule. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the PAH-SYMPACT™ is suitable for assessing symptoms and their impact in patients with SAPH. However, larger longitudinal studies are needed to confirm that it is fit for use in this patient population and that it can be used to reliably detect temporal changes in patients' symptom status. Trial registration Not applicable.

Symptoms, impacts, and suitability of the Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension - Symptoms and Impact (PAH-SYMPACT™) questionnaire in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH): a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a rare form of pulmonary hypertension caused by blood clots and scar tissue in the blood vessels of the lungs. Health-related quality of life is often significantly impaired in patients with CTEPH. However, a better understanding of how CTEPH symptoms affect patients' lives is needed to optimally assess the impact of the disease and treatment. OBJECTIVES: This qualitative study aimed to better understand the symptoms of CTEPH and how they affect patients' lives, as well as to determine the appropriateness of the Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension - Symptoms and Impact (PAH-SYMPACT™) questionnaire for use in this patient population. METHODS: Adults diagnosed with CTEPH, recruited from two clinical sites in the US, participated in one-to-one qualitative telephone interviews. They described their experience of CTEPH symptoms and the impact these symptoms have on their lives. They also provided feedback on the comprehensibility and relevance of the PAH-SYMPACT™'s instructions, items, and response options. RESULTS: Participants (N = 12) had a mean age of 62.5 years. Two thirds were female and most (83%) had undergone pulmonary endarterectomy and/or balloon pulmonary angioplasty. The most frequently endorsed symptoms were shortness of breath (endorsed by all 12 participants), fatigue (11 participants), and lightheadedness (10 participants). All participants identified shortness of breath as an "extremely important" symptom, and seven participants rated fatigue as "extremely important." The most frequent impacts of CTEPH were on ability to walk quickly (endorsed by all 12 participants), ability to walk up inclines or stairs (11 participants), and ability to carry things (11 participants). The PAH-SYMPACT™ items were relevant to most participants and reflected their experience of CTEPH. All participants indicated that no important CTEPH symptoms were missing from the PAH-SYMPACT™. Overall, the instructions, items, and response options of the PAH-SYMPACT™ were clear and easy to understand. CONCLUSIONS: The symptoms and impacts experienced by patients with CTEPH align with items included in the PAH-SYMPACT™. The PAH-SYMPACT™ appears to be fit for purpose for assessing disease status in patients with CTEPH.

Development and adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures for patients who experience itch associated with primary biliary cholangitis.

PURPOSE: To conduct qualitative interviews to evaluate and refine the Itch Diary (ID) and weekly version of the PBC-40 in patients with itching associated with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). METHODS: Twenty adults with self-reported PBC diagnoses and recent/ongoing itching of at least moderate intensity participated in face-to-face qualitative combined concept elicitation (CE) interviews and cognitive interviews after completing the morning and evening versions of the ID and weekly version of the PBC-40. These questionnaires were evaluated to confirm saturation of concepts of interest and cognitively test the English language versions of the measures in patients with PBC in the US and Canada. Transcripts were organized into descriptions of PBC-related symptoms and symptom-related impacts using a structured coding framework. Two waves of interviews were conducted; revisions made after wave 1 were further tested in wave 2. RESULTS: Interview results confirmed the relevance of concepts presented in the PBC-40 and ID to patients' experiences. Saturation of concept was achieved. Itching-related signs and symptoms (46%) were the most commonly expressed symptom concept in the CE interviews followed by energy-related (14%) and additional signs/symptoms (13%). Several changes to the ID were made in response to cognitive interview results. Changes to the PBC-40 included adaptations from British to North American English, and the appropriateness of a 7-day recall period was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: Relevance of the symptom and impact concepts in the ID to measure PBC-related itch were confirmed. Adaptation of the PBC-40 to a weekly recall period and for North American English was successful.

Frames of Reference in Self-Reports of Health, Well-being, Fatigue, and Pain: A Qualitative Examination.

OBJECTIVES: Self-reports in survey research can be affected by internal comparison standards, or Frames of Reference (FoRs), that people apply when making their ratings. The goal of this study was to determine which FoRs people naturally use when rating their health, subjective well-being, fatigue, and pain. We further examined whether FoRs varied by content domain and age group. METHODS: One hundred adults from a community sample of the US general population participated in individual semi-structured qualitative interviews. Participants provided self-report ratings on two of the four content domains and were then systematically queried about FoRs. Interview responses were summarized and coded into broad FoR categories. RESULTS: Four broad FoR categories emerged: References to (1) Other People, (2) an Earlier Time in Life, (3) an Important Event in the Past, and (4) a Hypothetical Situation. FoRs were reported in the majority (80.5%) of responses and multiple FoRs were reported in 34% of responses. The reporting of FoRs was evident for all domains, but was more prevalent for well-being compared to pain. References to a Hypothetical Situation were only mentioned in the well-being and health domains. For health, references to Other People were more frequently reported at older compared to younger ages. DISCUSSION: Our results extend prior work by demonstrating that participants' reporting of FoRs is evident in ratings of various content domains. They further suggest that a limited number of FoRs are used and that their identification holds promise for understanding and controlling systematic group differences in FoRs.