International Journal of Behavioral Medicine

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 609–617 | Cite as

Development and Psychometric Testing of the Hemophilia Well-being Index

Article

Abstract

Background

Hemophilia experts have recommended that screening tools should be introduced into clinical practice to assess patients’ needs and perceptions.

Purpose

The present work aims to describe the development of a brief instrument for the assessment of subjective well-being of men with hemophilia within an international study involving participants from 10 countries.

Methods

Several steps were implemented toward achieving this objective: (1) literature review; (2) semistructured interviews in different Ibero-American countries; (3) exploratory qualitative content analysis of the interviews; (4) definition of the construct being evaluated; (5) generation of preliminary items; (6) interjudgment ratings of the items, by both patients and experts, to assess comprehension and review items; and (7) psychometric testing of an international sample of 342 patients with hemophilia.

Results

Exploratory qualitative study allowed the development of an initial pool of items which adress salient life domains related to well-being. Interjudment ratings led to improvents in the wording and comprehensibilty of the preliminary pool of questions. Psychometric testing allowed items to be reviewed according to empirical criteria. The assessment of the underlying structure of the questionnaire by exploratory factor analysis (generalized least squares) showed a unidimensional model explaining 59.7 % of variance. Adequate internal consistency (0.91) and test–retest reliability (0.82) were observed for the instrument. Associations with other outcome measures and clinical indicators also provided a range of evidence for the instrument’s validity.

Conclusions

This study presents a new disease-specific tool which is able to assess subjective well-being in hemophilia patients.The instrument is available in Spanish, Portuguese (Brazilian), and English language versions for use in future research.

Keywords

Well-being Mental health Measurement Hemophilia HWBI Adults 

References

  1. 1.
    World Federation of Hemophilia. Guidelines for the management of hemophilia. Quebec: WFH; 2005.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dolan G. The challenge of an ageing haemophilic population. Haemophilia. 2010;16:11–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Salek SZ, Benson GM, Elezovic I, Krenn V, Ljung RC, Morfini M, et al. The need for speed in the management of haemophilia patients with inhibitors. Haemophilia. 2011;17:95–102. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2516.2010.02265x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Remor E. Quality of life in hemophilia. In: Rodríguez-Merchán EC, Valentino LA, editors. Current and future issues in hemophilia care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011. p. 49–54. doi:10.1002/9781119979401.ch11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arranz P, Remor E, Quintana M, Villar A, Díaz JL, Moreno M, et al. Development of a new disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire to adults living with haemophilia. Haemophilia. 2004;10:376–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Triemstra AH, Van der Ploeg HM, Smit C, Briët E, Adèr HJ, Rosendaal FR. Well-being of haemophilia patients: a model for direct and indirect effects of medical parameters on the physical and psychosocial functioning. Soc Sci Med. 1998;47:581–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Remor E. Development of a disease-specific measure to the assessment of quality of life in adult patients living with hemophilia in Latin America: the HemoLatin-QoL. Interam J Psychol. 2005;39:211–20.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Remor, E. Predictors of treatment difficulties and satisfaction with haemophilia therapy in adult patients. Haemophilia. 2011;17. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2516.2011.02578.x.
  9. 9.
    Sirgy MJ. The psychology of quality of life. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic; 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bullinger M. Quality of life—definition, conceptualization and implications—a methodologist’s view. Theor Surg. 1991;6:143–9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eignor DR. Standards for the development and use of tests: the standards for educational and psychological testing. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2011;17(3):157–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Revicki DA, Gnanasakthy A, Weinfurt K. Documenting the rationale and psychometric characteristics of patient-reported outcomes for labeling and promotional claims: the PRO evidence dossier. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(4):717–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Anatchkova MD, Bjorner JB. Health and role functioning: the use of focus groups in the development of an item bank. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:111–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    The EuroQol Group. EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ware JE, Kosinski M, Bjorner JB, Turner-Bowker DM, Gandek B, Maruish ME. User’s manual for the SF-36v2 Health Survey. 2nd ed. Lincoln: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2007.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corbin JM, Strauss AC. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2008.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lord FM, Novick MR. Statistical theories of mental tests scores. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1968.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Anastasi A, Urbina S. Psychological testing. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall; 1997.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spaan M. Test and item specifications development. Lang Assess Q. 2006;3(1):71–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval. 2005;10(7):173–8. http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n7.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2011.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brow TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford; 2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Behavioral Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dpto. de Psicología Biológica y de la Salud, Facultad de PsicologíaUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations