TY - JOUR
T1 - Known-groups validity and responsiveness to change of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS vs. 2.0)
T2 - a patient-reported measure of treatment burden
AU - Eton, David T.
AU - Lee, Minji K.
AU - St. Sauver, Jennifer L.
AU - Anderson, Roger T.
N1 - Funding Information:
The study was funded by the National Institute of Nursing Research of the National Institutes of Health (USA) under award number R01NR015441 (D. Eton, Principal Investigator). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Acknowledgements
Funding Information:
We thank Ms. Ann Harris and Ms. Wendy Daniels at the Mayo Clinic Survey Research Center for formatting, distribution, and receipt of the survey. We also thank Ms. Kandace Lackore, Ms. Sarah Jenkins, and Mr. Richard Pendegraft for database support, Ms. Bayly Bucknell for study coordination; and Ms. Karen Bell and Mr. Mark Korinek for assistance with formatting and design of the final manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
PY - 2020/11/1
Y1 - 2020/11/1
N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to test the known-groups validity and responsiveness to change of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS, vs. 2.0), a measure of treatment burden. Methods: The PETS and other standard measures were mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to adults living with multiple chronic conditions in southeast Minnesota (USA). A sample of 365 people (mean age = 62.1 years) completed both surveys. Baseline, 12-month, and changes in PETS burden scores were examined. Clinical anchors used to test validity included number of diagnoses (2–4 vs. 5+), mental health diagnosis (yes/no), medication adherence and health literacy (suboptimal/optimal), and changes in self-efficacy, global physical, and global mental health (worsening/improving). Independent-samples t-tests were used to compare scores. Results: PETS scales showed good internal consistency (αs ≥ 0.80). There were few differences across number of diagnoses, but having a mental health diagnosis was associated with higher baseline PETS burden scores (Ps <.05). Suboptimal medication adherence and health literacy over time were associated with worse 12-month PETS burden scores (Ps <.05). Compared with improvements, declines over time in self-efficacy, global physical health, and global mental health were each associated with worsening change scores on PETS impact summary, medical expenses, and bother due to medication reliance and medication side effects (Ps <.05). Conclusion: Among multi-morbid adults, the PETS demonstrated evidence of known-groups validity and responsiveness to change across both objective (e.g., mental health diagnoses) and subjective anchors (e.g., changes in self-efficacy, global physical, and global mental health).
AB - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to test the known-groups validity and responsiveness to change of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS, vs. 2.0), a measure of treatment burden. Methods: The PETS and other standard measures were mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to adults living with multiple chronic conditions in southeast Minnesota (USA). A sample of 365 people (mean age = 62.1 years) completed both surveys. Baseline, 12-month, and changes in PETS burden scores were examined. Clinical anchors used to test validity included number of diagnoses (2–4 vs. 5+), mental health diagnosis (yes/no), medication adherence and health literacy (suboptimal/optimal), and changes in self-efficacy, global physical, and global mental health (worsening/improving). Independent-samples t-tests were used to compare scores. Results: PETS scales showed good internal consistency (αs ≥ 0.80). There were few differences across number of diagnoses, but having a mental health diagnosis was associated with higher baseline PETS burden scores (Ps <.05). Suboptimal medication adherence and health literacy over time were associated with worse 12-month PETS burden scores (Ps <.05). Compared with improvements, declines over time in self-efficacy, global physical health, and global mental health were each associated with worsening change scores on PETS impact summary, medical expenses, and bother due to medication reliance and medication side effects (Ps <.05). Conclusion: Among multi-morbid adults, the PETS demonstrated evidence of known-groups validity and responsiveness to change across both objective (e.g., mental health diagnoses) and subjective anchors (e.g., changes in self-efficacy, global physical, and global mental health).
KW - Multi-morbidity
KW - Patient-related experience
KW - Patient-reported outcome
KW - Questionnaire
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086342079&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85086342079&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11136-020-02546-x
DO - 10.1007/s11136-020-02546-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 32524346
AN - SCOPUS:85086342079
SN - 0962-9343
VL - 29
SP - 3143
EP - 3154
JO - Quality of Life Research
JF - Quality of Life Research
IS - 11
ER -