Preview

Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology

Advanced search

The Questionnaire Survey Method in Medicine on the Example of Treatment Adherence Scales

https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2021-08-02

Full Text:

Abstract

Aim. Development, testing and validation of the original questionnaire “Adherence Scale” (AS) in the PRIORITY and ANTEY observational studies (OS).

Materials and methods. The OS PRIORITY assessed adherence to statins in 298 patients with high and very high cardiovascular risk for 3 months. The OS ANTEY assessed adherence to oral anticoagulants in 201 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation for 1 year. Adherence was assessed using the original AS questionnaire, for which external validation was performed (with the calculation of the Cohen's Kappa coefficient). The reference methods were the validated questionnaire and direct medical interview. And internal validation was performed (consistency of questions on the AS using Spearman's correlation analysis). The sensitivity, specificity (ROC analysis) and retest reliability of the adherence scale (Cronbach's alpha) were also determined.

Results. In the OS PRIORITY Cohen's kappa for the AS and the reference method of direct medical survey was 0.76 (high consistency), and for the AS and the reference method of the validated questionnaire=0.28 (low consistency). High internal consistency of the questionnaire questions (correlation coefficient=0.78, p<0.0001) confirms the internal validity of the adherence scale. Evaluation of the main characteristics of the modified AS in the OS ANTEY showed high consistency between the results of the AS and the validated questionnaire: Cohen's kappa=0.94 (high external validity of the AS). The retest reliability of the AS was 0.76 (Cronbach's alpha). The internal consistency of the questionnaire was confirmed by a strong and statistically significant correlation between the test questions: Spearman's correlation coefficient=0.80, p<0.0001. The sensitivity of the test, determined using the ROC analysis, was 89%, and the specificity was 62%.

Conclusion. The developed and tested new original questionnaire (modified version) – the AS – showed high indicators of reliability, validity and sensitivity. This ensures its reliability and ease of use for assessing various types of adherence and determining the leading factors of non-adherence, and also allows its use in scientific studies and clinical practice.

About the Authors

Yu. V. Lukina
National Medical Research Center for Therapy and Preventive Medicine
Russian Federation

Yulia V. Lukina

eLibrary SPIN 8949-4964

Moscow



N. P. Kutishenko
National Medical Research Center for Therapy and Preventive Medicine
Russian Federation

Natalia P. Kutishenko

eLibrary  SPIN  7893-9865

Moscow



S. Yu. Martsevich
National Medical Research Center for Therapy and Preventive Medicine
Russian Federation

Sergey Yu. Martsevich

eLibrary SPIN 7908-9554

Moscow



O. M. Drapkina
National Medical Research Center for Therapy and Preventive Medicine
Russian Federation

Oxana M. Drapkina

eLibrary SPIN 4456-1297

Moscow



References

1. Spertus JA, Winder JA, Dewhurst TA, et al. Development and evaluation of the Seattle Angina questionnaire: A new functional status measure for coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25(2):333-41. DOI:10.1016/0735-1097(94)00397-9.

2. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473-83.

3. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361-70. DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x.

4. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, et al. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1997;49(6):822-30. DOI:10.1016/s0090-4295(97)00238-0.

5. Lukina YuV, Kutishenko NP, Martsevich SYu, Drapkina OM. Questionnaires and scores for assessing medication adherence – advantages and disadvantages of the diagnostic method in research and actual clinical practice. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2020;19(3):2562 (In Russ.). DOI:10.15829/1728-8800-2020-2562.

6. Nguyen TM, Caze AL, Cottrell N. What are validated self-report adherence scales really measuring?: a systematic review. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2014;77(3):427-45. DOI:10.1111/bcp.12194.

7. Lavsa SM, Holzworth A, Ansani NT. Selection of a validated scale for measuring medication adherence. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2011;51(1):90-4. DOI:10.1331/JAPhA.2011.09154.

8. Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive validity of self-reported measure of medical adherence. Med Care. 1986;24:67-73. DOI:10.1097/00005650-198601000-00007.

9. Morisky DE, Ang A, Krousel-Wood M, Ward HJ. Predictive validity of a medication adherence measure in an outpatient setting. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2008;10(5):348-54. DOI:10.1111/j.17517176.2008.07572.x.

10. Pineiro F, Gil V, Donis M, et al. The validity of 6 indirect methods for assessing drug treatment compliance in arterial hypertension. Aten. Primaria. 1997;19(7):372-4.

11. Arnet I, Metaxas C, Walter PN. The 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale translated in German and validated against objective and subjective polypharmacy adherence measures in cardiovascular patients. J Eval Clin Pract. 2015;21(2):271-7. DOI:10.1111/jep.12303.

12. Marcus A. Pay up or retract? Survey creator’s demands for money rile some health researchers. Science. Washington, DC: ScienceMag.org; 2017 [cited by May 30, 2021. Available from: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/09/pay-or-retract-survey-creators-demands-money-rile-some-health-researchers. DOI:10.1126/science.aap9445.

13. Martsevich SYu, Lukina YuV, Kutishenko NP, et al. Features and main problems of treating patients with high and very high cardiovascular risk with statins in real clinical practice (according to the data of the “PRIORITET” research). Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2018;17(6):52-60 (In Russ.). DOI:10.15829/1728-88002018-6-52-61.

14. Martsevich SYu, Lukina YuV, Kutishenko NP, et al. Adherence to Treatment with New Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients in Real Clinical Practice (Results of the ANTEY Study). Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology. 2019;15(6):864-72 (In Russ.). DOI:10.20996/1819-6446-2019-15-6-864-872.

15. Martsevich SYu, Lukina YuV, Kutishenko NP, et al. on behalf of the working group of the observational study PRIORITY. Adherence to Statins Therapy of High and Very High Cardiovascular Risk Patients in Real Clinical Practice: Diagnostics and Possible Ways to Solve the Problem (According to the PRIORITY Observational Study). Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology. 2018;14(6):891-900 (In Russ). DOI:10.20996/1819-6446-2018-14-6-891-900.

16. Akimova MK, ed. Psychodiagnostics. Theory and practice. 4th edition. Moscow: Yurayt Publishing House; 2016 (In Russ.)

17. Belova AN, ed. Scales, tests and questionnaires in neurology and neurosurgery. 3rd edition. Moscow: Practical Medicine; 2018 (In Russ.)

18. Schofield MJ, Forrester-Knauss C. Surveys and questionnaires in health research. In: Liamputtong P, Ed. Research methods in health: Foundations for evidence-based practice. 2nd edition. South Melbourne, Vic: Oxford University Press; 2013.

19. Anastasi A, Urbina S. Psychological testing. 7th edition. St. Petersburg: Peter; 2005 (In Russ.)

20. Viana M, Laszczynska O, Mendes S, et al. Medication adherence to specific drug classes in chronic heart failure. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2014;20(10):1018-26. DOI:10.18553/jmcp.2014.20.10.1018.

21. deVries ST, Keers JC, Visser R, et al. Medication beliefs, treatment complexity, and non-adherence to different drug classes in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Psychosom Res. 2014;76(2):134-8. DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychores.


For citation:


Lukina Yu.V., Kutishenko N.P., Martsevich S.Yu., Drapkina O.M. The Questionnaire Survey Method in Medicine on the Example of Treatment Adherence Scales. Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology. 2021;17(4):576-583. https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2021-08-02

Views: 181


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1819-6446 (Print)
ISSN 2225-3653 (Online)