Development and initial psychometric evaluation of the hepatitis C virus-patient-reported outcomes (HCV-PRO) instrument
Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is an important public health issue owing to its worldwide prevalence and its profound effects on patients’ well-being and function. We developed a new patient self-report tool, the HCV patient-reported outcomes (HCV-PRO) instrument, to assess patients’ function and well-being reflecting both HCV disease and treatment burdens.
Items were developed through a qualitative phase including scientific literature review, expert appraisal, and semi-structured patient interviews. The item pool was initially psychometrically tested in 60 adult HCV patients, 18 years of age or older at a university hepatology clinic. A final psychometric test was conducted in 241 members of the online Harris International Panel to examine scale reliability, confirm factor structure, and assess convergent and discriminant validity.
A single-factor 16-item HCV-PRO instrument demonstrated good model fit. The HCV-PRO items and total score (range 0–100) showed excellent item response (few floor and ceiling effects) and reliability (alpha > 0.90). Convergent validity was established from moderate to high (r > 0.50) correlation with symptom burden, life satisfaction (ladder of life), and SF-36v2 scales scores. Mean HCV-PRO scores differentiated between currently treated patients, those previously treated, and patients never treated (p < 0.01), suggesting strong known-groups validity.
The results provide initial evidence that the HCV-PRO can yield reliable and valid measurement of the effects of HCV and its treatment on the well-being and function of HCV-infected patients.
KeywordsPsychometric methods Questionnaires Health status Quality of life
Medical writing and editing services were provided by Amanda Perry, BA Palmyra PA, and Fabian Camacho MS Hershey PA for statistical support. Medical writing support was funded by Abbott Laboratories Inc., Abbott Park, Illinois.
- 1.World Health Organization. (2012). Hepatitis C. Fact Sheet N°164. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs164/en/. Accessed 17 Sept, 2012.
- 8.Smith, B. D., Morgan, R. L., Beckett, G. A., et al. (2012). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations for the identification of chronic hepatitis C virus infection among persons born during 1945–1965. MMWR Recommendations and Reports 61(No. RR-4): 1–36.Google Scholar
- 10.National Institutes of Health. (2002). National institutes of health consensus development conference statement. Management of hepatitis C: 2002. NIH Consensus Development Program. http://consensus.nih.gov/2002/2002hepatitisc2002116html.htm. Accessed 20 Sept 2012.
- 12.Siebert, U., & Sroczynski, G. (2005). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of initial combination therapy with interferon/peginterferon plus ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C in Germany: A health technology assessment commissioned by the German federal ministry of health and social security. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 21(1), 55–65.Google Scholar
- 13.Younossi, Z. M., Aggarwal, J., Martin, M., et al. (2012). Health-related quality-of-life among genotype 1 treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis C patients receiving telaprevir combination treatment: Post hoc analyses of data from the ADVANCE trial. Journal of Hepatology, 56(Suppl 2), S462–S463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Younossi, Z. M., Aggarwal, J., Martin, M., et al. (2012b). Health-related quality-of-life among genotype 1 treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis C patients receiving telaprevir combination treatment: Post hoc analyses of data from the ADVANCE trial. Gastroenterology 142(Suppl 5): S-955. [Abstract Sa1048].Google Scholar
- 16.Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Guidance for industry on patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Federal Register, 74, 65132–65133.Google Scholar
- 18.Shumaker, S. A., Berzon, R., & Hays, R. (Eds.). (1993). Special issue. International use, application and performance of health-related quality of life instruments. Quality of Life Research, 2(6), 367–368.Google Scholar
- 20.Ware, J. E, Jr, Kosinski, M., Bjorner, J. B., Turner-Bowker, D. M., Gandek, B., & Maruish, M. E. (2007). User’s manual for the SF-36v2 health survey (2nd ed.). Lincoln: Quality Metric Incorporated.Google Scholar
- 21.Cantril, H. (1965). The pattern of human concerns. New Brubswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- 23.Hollander, A., Foster, G. R., & Weiland, O. (2006). Health-related quality of life before, during and after combination therapy with interferon and ribavirin in unselected Swedish patients with chronic hepatitis C. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 41(5), 577–585.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Nunnally, J. C., & Berstain, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- 29.Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- 34.Gralnek, I. M., Hays, R. D., Kilbourne, A., Rosen, H. R., Keeffe, E. B., Artinian, L., et al. (2000). Development and evaluation of the liver disease quality of life instrument in persons with advanced, chronic liver disease: The LDQOL 1.0. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 95(12), 3552–3565.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Shumaker, S. A., Anderson, R. T., & Czajkowski, S. M. (1990). Psychological tests and scales. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of life assessments in clinical trials (pp. 95–114). New York: Raven Press.Google Scholar