Novel measures to assess ventricular assist device patient-reported outcomes: Findings from the MCS A-QOL study.

BACKGROUND: Generic and heart failure-specific measures do not capture unique aspects of living with a ventricular assist device (VAD). Using state-of-the-science psychometric measurement methods, we developed a measurement system to assess post-ventricular assist device adjustment and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: Patients were recruited from 10/26/16-2/29/20 from 12 U.S. VAD programs. We created a dataset of participants (n = 620) enrolled before left (L)VAD implantation, with data at 3- or 6- months post-implantation (group1 [n = 154]), and participants enrolled after LVAD implantation, with data at one timepoint (group 2 [n = 466]). We constructed 5 item banks: 3 modified from existing measures and 2 new measures. Analyses included item response theory (IRT) modeling, differential item functioning tests for systematic measurement bias, and indicators of reliability and validity. RESULTS: Of 620 participants, 56% (n = 345) were implanted as destination therapy, 51% (n = 316) were <12 months post-implantation, mean age = 57.3 years, 78% (n = 485) male, 70% (n = 433) White, 58% (n = 353) married/partnered, and 58% (n = 357) with >high school education. We developed 5 new VAD item banks/measures: 6-item VAD Team Communication; 12-item Self-efficacy Regarding VAD Self-care; 11-item Being Bothered by VAD Self-care and Limitations; 7-item Satisfaction with Treatment; and 11-item Stigma. Cronbach's alpha reliability ranged from good (≥0.80) to excellent (≥0.90) for item banks/measures. All measures, except VAD Team Communication, demonstrated at least moderate correlations (≥0.30) with construct validity indicators. CONCLUSIONS: These measures meet IRT modeling assumptions and requirements; scores demonstrate reliability and validity. Use of these measures may assist VAD clinicians to inform patients about VADs as a treatment option and guide post-VAD interventions.

Development and validation of the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy treatment satisfaction (FACIT TS) measures.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate a new functional assessment of chronic illness therapy (FACIT) measure of satisfaction with treatment for chronic illnesses such as cancer and HIV/AIDS. METHODS: To define domains and generate items, a literature review informed creation of semi-structured interview guides for patients and an international expert panel of clinicians and researchers. Patients and experts also rated 15 areas of satisfaction for relevance. The final list of items underwent further refinement by the original expert panel and a new group of clinical experts. Items were tested in four studies (primarily lung cancer) and data were pooled for analysis. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), and item response theory modeling were conducted to evaluate dimensionality. Internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability were both evaluated. Validity was evaluated by correlating the FACIT subscale scores and measures of comparable concepts and by testing the scales' ability to distinguish people according to their overall treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: Two instruments were created: the FACIT TS-general (G), an overall evaluation of current treatment, and the FACIT TS-patient satisfaction (PS), a measure of patient satisfaction. CFA results were not optimal for a five-factor solution for PS. Internal consistency reliability met psychometric standards (≥0.70) for all PS subscales. Construct validity was established for the PS subscales: Physician Communication, Treatment Staff Communication, Technical Competence, Confidence and Trust, and Nurse Communication. CONCLUSIONS: The two instruments generated here offer a new way to assess several key dimensions of patient satisfaction with treatment, especially for people with lung cancer.