Design of a treatment satisfaction measure for patients undergoing varicose vein treatment: Venous Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (VenousTSQ).

BACKGROUND: Established condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures for varicose veins are limited to the measurement of health status and function. A treatment satisfaction measure is needed to understand patient satisfaction with different treatment options. The aim of this study was to design a Venous Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (VenousTSQ) that would be ready for large-scale data collection and psychometric evaluation. METHODS: Relevant items were selected from the -TSQ Item Library and new items were designed where necessary. A draft VenousTSQ was prepared using the existing AneurysmTSQ as a template. Fifteen interviews were conducted from 4 days to 16 months after the procedure. The interviews were designed to elicit important sources of satisfaction or dissatisfaction before completion of draft questionnaires. The VenousTSQ drafts were modified between sets of interviews until no further changes were required. RESULTS: The final VenousTSQ consists of two questionnaires: VenousTSQ early (VenousTSQe) and VenousTSQ status (VenousTSQs). Items that need be asked only once are in the VenousTSQe, whereas those that can usefully be asked more than once are in the VenousTSQs. Of the 16 unique items forming the VenousTSQ, 12 were from the -TSQ Item Library. Only 1 of these 12 required significant modification. CONCLUSIONS: The VenousTSQ represents a condition-specific psychological outcome measure for varicose veins, enabling patient satisfaction or dissatisfaction with such treatments to be measured. Large-scale data collection is under way to establish optimal scoring, quantitative validity, and reliability of the VenousTSQ.

Changes in quality of life (QoL) and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in living-donor and deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients and those awaiting transplantation in the UK ATTOM programme: a longitudinal cohort questionnaire survey with additional qualitative interviews.

OBJECTIVE: To examine quality of life (QoL) and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in kidney transplant recipients and those awaiting transplantation. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort questionnaire surveys and qualitative semi-structured interviews using thematic analysis with a pragmatic approach. SETTING: Completion of generic and disease-specific PROMs at two time points, and telephone interviews with participants UK-wide. PARTICIPANTS: 101 incident deceased-donor (DD) and 94 incident living-donor (LD) kidney transplant recipients, together with 165 patients on the waiting list (WL) from 18 UK centres recruited to the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures (ATTOM) programme completed PROMs at recruitment (November 2011 to March 2013) and 1 year follow-up. Forty-one of the 165 patients on the WL received a DD transplant and 26 received a LD transplant during the study period, completing PROMs initially as patients on the WL, and again 1 year post-transplant. A subsample of 10 LD and 10 DD recipients participated in qualitative semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: LD recipients were younger, had more educational qualifications and more often received a transplant before dialysis. Controlling for these and other factors, cross-sectional analyses at 12 months post-transplant suggested better QoL, renal-dependent QoL and treatment satisfaction for LD than DD recipients. Patients on the WL reported worse outcomes compared with both transplant groups. However, longitudinal analyses (controlling for pre-transplant differences) showed that LD and DD recipients reported similarly improved health status and renal-dependent QoL (p<0.01) pre-transplant to post-transplant. Patients on the WL had worsened health status but no change in QoL. Qualitative analyses revealed transplant recipients' expectations influenced their recovery and satisfaction with transplant. CONCLUSIONS: While cross-sectional analyses suggested LD kidney transplantation leads to better QoL and treatment satisfaction, longitudinal assessment showed similar QoL improvements in PROMs for both transplant groups, with better outcomes than for those still wait-listed. Regardless of transplant type, clinicians need to be aware that managing expectations is important for facilitating patients' adjustment post-transplant.

Changes in quality of life, health status and other patient-reported outcomes following simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation (SPKT): a quantitative and qualitative analysis within a UK-wide programme.

We examined quality of life (QoL) and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in 95 simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplant (SPKT) recipients and 41 patients wait-listed for SPKT recruited to the UK Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures (ATTOM) programme. Wait-listed patients transplanted within 12 months of recruitment (n = 22) were followed 12 months post-transplant and compared with those still wait-listed (n = 19) to examine pre- to post-transplant changes. Qualitative interviews with ten SPKT recipients 12 months post-transplant were analysed thematically. Cross-sectional analyses showed several better 12-month outcomes for SPKT recipients compared with those still wait-listed, a trend to better health utilities but no difference in diabetes-specific QoL or diabetes treatment satisfaction. Pre- to post-transplant, SPKT recipients showed improved treatment satisfaction, well-being, self-reported health, generic QoL and less negative impact on renal-specific QoL (ps < 0.05). Health utility values were better overall in transplant recipients and neither these nor diabetes-specific QoL changed significantly in either group. Pre-emptive transplant advantages seen in 12-month cross-sectional analyses disappeared when controlling for baseline values. Qualitative findings indicated diabetes complications, self-imposed blood glucose monitoring and dietary restrictions continued to impact QoL negatively post-transplant. Unrealistic expectations of SPKT caused some disappointment. Measuring condition-specific PROMs over time will help in demonstrating the benefits and limitations of SPKT.

Patient preferences, knowledge and beliefs about kidney allocation: qualitative findings from the UK-wide ATTOM programme.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how patients who are wait-listed for or who have received a kidney transplant understand the current UK kidney allocation system, and their views on ways to allocate kidneys in the future. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and thematic analysis based on a pragmatic approach. PARTICIPANTS: 10 deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients, 10 live-donor kidney transplant recipients, 12 participants currently wait-listed for a kidney transplant and 4 participants whose kidney transplant failed. SETTING: Semistructured telephone interviews conducted with participants in their own homes across the UK. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: uncertainty of knowledge of the allocation scheme; evaluation of the system and participant suggestions for future allocation schemes. Most participants identified human leucocyte anitgen matching as a factor in determining kidney allocation, but were often uncertain of the accuracy of their knowledge. In the absence of information that would allow a full assessment, the majority of participants consider that the current system is effective. A minority of participants were concerned about the perceived lack of transparency of the general decision-making processes within the scheme. Most participants felt that people who are younger and those better matched to the donor kidney should be prioritised for kidney allocation, but in contrast to the current scheme, less priority was considered appropriate for longer waiting patients. Some non-medical themes were also discussed, such as whether parents of dependent children should be prioritised for allocation, and whether patients with substance abuse problems be deprioritised. CONCLUSIONS: Our participants held differing views about the most important factors for kidney allocation, some of which were in contrast to the current scheme. Patient participation in reviewing future allocation policies will provide insight as to what is considered acceptable to patients and inform healthcare staff of the kinds of information patients would find most useful.