Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 5/2017

Open Access 01-10-2017 | Original Research Article

Development and Pretesting of a Questionnaire to Assess Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM Questionnaire)

Authors: Merel L. Kimman, Adrienne H. Rotteveel, Marlies Wijsenbeek, Rémy Mostard, Nelleke C. Tak, Xana van Jaarsveld, Marjolein Storm, Kioa L. Wijnsma, Marielle Gelens, Nicole C. A. J. van de Kar, Jack Wetzels, Carmen D. Dirksen

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 5/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to develop, together with the Lung Foundation Netherlands and Dutch Kidney Patients Association, patients and clinicians, a measure to evaluate patient experiences with the orphan drugs pirfenidone (for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis [IPF]) and eculizumab (for atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome [aHUS]), as well as a generic measure of patient experiences and satisfaction with medications.

Methods

Development of the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) questionnaire consisted of four phases: literature review (phase I); focus groups and individual patient interviews (phase II); item generation (phase III); and face and content validity testing (phase IV). Literature review aimed to identify existing disease-specific and generic patient experience measures to provide guidance on the domains of medication use relevant to patients, the number of items and type of response categories, and to generate an initial pool of items. Subsequent focus groups and patient interviews were conducted to gain insight into the perceived effectiveness of the therapies, the burden of side effects, and how the medication impacted on a patient’s daily life. Focus groups and interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Coding was carried out by highlighting passages in the text and assigning each passage a code representing the following predefined categories: (1) perceived effectiveness; (2) side effects; (3) ease of use; and (4) impact of medication. Using data from phase I and II, a panel of experts selected items relevant for inclusion in the questionnaire. Individual patient interviews with IPF and aHUS patients (n = 18), using a retrospective verbal probing technique, were conducted to assess face validity, time needed to fill out the questionnaire, and content validity.

Results

The PESaM questionnaire that was developed consisted of two disease-specific modules that assessed patient experiences with pirfenidone for the treatment of IPF, and eculizumab for the treatment of aHUS, a generic module, applicable to any medication, and a module to assess patient expectations. Review of the literature identified multiple disease- or medication-specific questionnaires and two generic patient satisfaction questionnaires. Common domains across most questionnaires were effectiveness, side effects, ease of use and overall satisfaction. Patient interviews revealed the social impact (e.g. unable to go outside) of side effects such as photosensitivity associated with pirfenidone and the risk of infection associated with eculizumab. Each PESaM module focuses on patients’ perceived effectiveness of the medication, side effects, and ease of use, and the impact these aspects have on physical and emotional health and daily life. The generic module additionally includes items related to satisfaction with the medication. Individual interviews with patients in phase IV confirmed, in general, that questions and response options of the modules were clear and content validity was good. The mean time to complete the modules ranged from 6 min for the disease-specific (aHUS) module to 9 min for the generic module.

Conclusions

We developed the PESaM questionnaire to quantitatively assess patient experiences and satisfaction with medications. A validation study is currently underway to examine the psychometric properties of the PESaM questionnaire.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bensing J. Bridging the gap. The separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine. Patient Educ Couns. 2000;39(1):17–25.CrossRefPubMed Bensing J. Bridging the gap. The separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine. Patient Educ Couns. 2000;39(1):17–25.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Britten N, Pope C, Halford S, Richeldi L. What if we made stratified medicine work for patients? Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(1):8–10.CrossRefPubMed Britten N, Pope C, Halford S, Richeldi L. What if we made stratified medicine work for patients? Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(1):8–10.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Facey K, Boivin A, Gracia J, Hansen HP, Lo Scalzo A, Mossman J, et al. Patients’ perspectives in health technology assessment: a route to robust evidence and fair deliberation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26(3):334–40.CrossRefPubMed Facey K, Boivin A, Gracia J, Hansen HP, Lo Scalzo A, Mossman J, et al. Patients’ perspectives in health technology assessment: a route to robust evidence and fair deliberation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26(3):334–40.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Hailey D, Werko S, Bakri R, Cameron A, Gohlen B, Myles S, et al. Involvement of consumers in health technology assessment activities by Inahta agencies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(1):79–83.CrossRefPubMed Hailey D, Werko S, Bakri R, Cameron A, Gohlen B, Myles S, et al. Involvement of consumers in health technology assessment activities by Inahta agencies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(1):79–83.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Krahn M, Naglie G. The next step in guideline development: incorporating patient preferences. JAMA. 2008;300(4):436–8.CrossRefPubMed Krahn M, Naglie G. The next step in guideline development: incorporating patient preferences. JAMA. 2008;300(4):436–8.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Utens CM, van der Weijden T, Joore MA, Dirksen CD. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development: exploratory study into current state of play and potential barriers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:540.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Utens CM, van der Weijden T, Joore MA, Dirksen CD. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development: exploratory study into current state of play and potential barriers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:540.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Wijsenbeek M, van Manen M, Bonella F. New insights on patient-reported outcome measures in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: only PROMises? Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2016;22(5):434–41.CrossRefPubMed Wijsenbeek M, van Manen M, Bonella F. New insights on patient-reported outcome measures in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: only PROMises? Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2016;22(5):434–41.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference van Overveld LF, Braspenning JC, Hermens RP. Quality indicators of integrated care for patients with head and neck cancer. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42(2):322–9.CrossRefPubMed van Overveld LF, Braspenning JC, Hermens RP. Quality indicators of integrated care for patients with head and neck cancer. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42(2):322–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Hendriks M, Dahlhaus-Booij J, Plass AM. Clients’ perspective on quality of audiology care: development of the Consumer Quality Index (CQI) ‘Audiology Care’ for measuring client experiences. Int J Audiol. 2017;56(1):8–15.CrossRefPubMed Hendriks M, Dahlhaus-Booij J, Plass AM. Clients’ perspective on quality of audiology care: development of the Consumer Quality Index (CQI) ‘Audiology Care’ for measuring client experiences. Int J Audiol. 2017;56(1):8–15.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Zuidgeest M, Sixma H, Rademakers J. Measuring patients’ experiences with rheumatic care: the consumer quality index rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int. 2009;30(2):159–67.CrossRefPubMed Zuidgeest M, Sixma H, Rademakers J. Measuring patients’ experiences with rheumatic care: the consumer quality index rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int. 2009;30(2):159–67.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Ahmed F, Burt J, Roland M. Measuring patient experience: concepts and methods. Patient. 2014;7(3):235–41.CrossRefPubMed Ahmed F, Burt J, Roland M. Measuring patient experience: concepts and methods. Patient. 2014;7(3):235–41.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rademakers J, Delnoij D, Boer D. Structure, process or outcome: which contributes most to patients’ overall assessment of healthcare quality? BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(4):326–31.CrossRefPubMed Rademakers J, Delnoij D, Boer D. Structure, process or outcome: which contributes most to patients’ overall assessment of healthcare quality? BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(4):326–31.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Anhang Price R, Elliott MN, Zaslavsky AM, Hays RD, Lehrman WG, Rybowski L, et al. Examining the role of patient experience surveys in measuring health care quality. Med Care Res Rev. 2014;71(5):522–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Anhang Price R, Elliott MN, Zaslavsky AM, Hays RD, Lehrman WG, Rybowski L, et al. Examining the role of patient experience surveys in measuring health care quality. Med Care Res Rev. 2014;71(5):522–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Cleary PD. Evolving concepts of patient-centered care and the assessment of patient care experiences: optimism and opposition. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2016;41(4):675–96.CrossRefPubMed Cleary PD. Evolving concepts of patient-centered care and the assessment of patient care experiences: optimism and opposition. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2016;41(4):675–96.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Claessen SJ, Francke AL, Sixma HJ, de Veer AJ, Deliens L. Measuring patients’ experiences with palliative care: the Consumer Quality Index Palliative Care. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2012;2(4):367–72.CrossRefPubMed Claessen SJ, Francke AL, Sixma HJ, de Veer AJ, Deliens L. Measuring patients’ experiences with palliative care: the Consumer Quality Index Palliative Care. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2012;2(4):367–72.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Shikiar R, Rentz AM. Satisfaction with medication: an overview of conceptual, methodologic, and regulatory issues. Value Health. 2004;7(2):204–15.CrossRefPubMed Shikiar R, Rentz AM. Satisfaction with medication: an overview of conceptual, methodologic, and regulatory issues. Value Health. 2004;7(2):204–15.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Wolf J, Niederhauser V, Marshburn D, LaVela S. Defining patient experience. Patient Exp J. 2014;1(1):7–19. Wolf J, Niederhauser V, Marshburn D, LaVela S. Defining patient experience. Patient Exp J. 2014;1(1):7–19.
18.
go back to reference Strasser S, Aharony L, Greenberger D. The patient satisfaction process: moving toward a comprehensive model. Med Care Rev. 1993;50(2):219–48.CrossRefPubMed Strasser S, Aharony L, Greenberger D. The patient satisfaction process: moving toward a comprehensive model. Med Care Rev. 1993;50(2):219–48.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Entwistle V, Firnigl D, Ryan M, Francis J, Kinghorn P. Which experiences of health care delivery matter to service users and why? A critical interpretive synthesis and conceptual map. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012;17(2):70–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Entwistle V, Firnigl D, Ryan M, Francis J, Kinghorn P. Which experiences of health care delivery matter to service users and why? A critical interpretive synthesis and conceptual map. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012;17(2):70–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Utens CM, Joore MA, van der Weijden T, Dirksen CD. Towards integration of research evidence on patient preferences in coverage decisions and clinical practice guidelines: a proposal for a taxonomy of preference-related terms. Value Health. 2014;17(7):A583–4.CrossRefPubMed Utens CM, Joore MA, van der Weijden T, Dirksen CD. Towards integration of research evidence on patient preferences in coverage decisions and clinical practice guidelines: a proposal for a taxonomy of preference-related terms. Value Health. 2014;17(7):A583–4.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Laba TL, Essue B, Kimman M, Jan S. Understanding patient preferences in medication nonadherence: a review of stated preference data. Patient. 2015;8(5):385–95.CrossRefPubMed Laba TL, Essue B, Kimman M, Jan S. Understanding patient preferences in medication nonadherence: a review of stated preference data. Patient. 2015;8(5):385–95.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Kane RL, Maciejewski M, Finch M. The relationship of patient satisfaction with care and clinical outcomes. Med Care. 1997;35(7):714–30.CrossRefPubMed Kane RL, Maciejewski M, Finch M. The relationship of patient satisfaction with care and clinical outcomes. Med Care. 1997;35(7):714–30.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Lindhiem O, Bennett CB, Trentacosta CJ, McLear C. Client preferences affect treatment satisfaction, completion, and clinical outcome: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2014;34(6):506–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lindhiem O, Bennett CB, Trentacosta CJ, McLear C. Client preferences affect treatment satisfaction, completion, and clinical outcome: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2014;34(6):506–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Shingler SL, Bennett BM, Cramer JA, Towse A, Twelves C, Lloyd AJ. Treatment preference, adherence and outcomes in patients with cancer: literature review and development of a theoretical model. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(11):2329–41.CrossRefPubMed Shingler SL, Bennett BM, Cramer JA, Towse A, Twelves C, Lloyd AJ. Treatment preference, adherence and outcomes in patients with cancer: literature review and development of a theoretical model. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(11):2329–41.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Dirksen CD. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in health care decision-making: issues, controversies and moving forward. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14(6):785–94.CrossRefPubMed Dirksen CD. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in health care decision-making: issues, controversies and moving forward. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14(6):785–94.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference van de Bovenkamp HM, Zuiderent-Jerak T. An empirical study of patient participation in guideline development: exploring the potential for articulating patient knowledge in evidence-based epistemic settings. Health Expect. 2015;18(5):942–55.CrossRefPubMed van de Bovenkamp HM, Zuiderent-Jerak T. An empirical study of patient participation in guideline development: exploring the potential for articulating patient knowledge in evidence-based epistemic settings. Health Expect. 2015;18(5):942–55.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Boon W, Martins L, Koopmanschap M. Governance of conditional reimbursement practices in The Netherlands. Health Policy. 2015;119(2):180–5.CrossRefPubMed Boon W, Martins L, Koopmanschap M. Governance of conditional reimbursement practices in The Netherlands. Health Policy. 2015;119(2):180–5.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Thompson AG, Sunol R. Expectations as determinants of patient satisfaction: concepts, theory and evidence. Int J Qual Health Care. 1995;7(2):127–41.CrossRefPubMed Thompson AG, Sunol R. Expectations as determinants of patient satisfaction: concepts, theory and evidence. Int J Qual Health Care. 1995;7(2):127–41.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Raghu G, Collard HR, Egan JJ, Martinez FJ, Behr J, Brown KK, et al. An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT statement: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and management. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(6):788–824.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Raghu G, Collard HR, Egan JJ, Martinez FJ, Behr J, Brown KK, et al. An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT statement: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and management. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(6):788–824.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Ley B, Collard HR, King TE Jr. Clinical course and prediction of survival in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(4):431–40.CrossRefPubMed Ley B, Collard HR, King TE Jr. Clinical course and prediction of survival in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(4):431–40.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Raghu G, Rochwerg B, Zhang Y, Garcia CA, Azuma A, Behr J, et al. An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT clinical practice guideline: treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. An update of the 2011 clinical practice guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;192(2):e3–19.CrossRefPubMed Raghu G, Rochwerg B, Zhang Y, Garcia CA, Azuma A, Behr J, et al. An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT clinical practice guideline: treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. An update of the 2011 clinical practice guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;192(2):e3–19.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Fukihara J, Kondoh Y. Nintedanib (OFEV) in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2016;10(12):1247–54.CrossRefPubMed Fukihara J, Kondoh Y. Nintedanib (OFEV) in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2016;10(12):1247–54.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Richeldi L, du Bois RM, Raghu G, Azuma A, Brown KK, Costabel U, et al. Efficacy and safety of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(22):2071–82.CrossRefPubMed Richeldi L, du Bois RM, Raghu G, Azuma A, Brown KK, Costabel U, et al. Efficacy and safety of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(22):2071–82.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference King TE Jr, Bradford WZ, Castro-Bernardini S, Fagan EA, Glaspole I, Glassberg MK, et al. A phase 3 trial of pirfenidone in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(22):2083–92.CrossRefPubMed King TE Jr, Bradford WZ, Castro-Bernardini S, Fagan EA, Glaspole I, Glassberg MK, et al. A phase 3 trial of pirfenidone in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(22):2083–92.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Trawinska MA, Rupesinghe RD, Hart SP. Patient considerations and drug selection in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2016;12:563–74.PubMedPubMedCentral Trawinska MA, Rupesinghe RD, Hart SP. Patient considerations and drug selection in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2016;12:563–74.PubMedPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Bridges JF, Paly VF, Barker E, Kervitsky D. Identifying the benefits and risks of emerging treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a qualitative study. Patient. 2015;8(1):85–92.CrossRefPubMed Bridges JF, Paly VF, Barker E, Kervitsky D. Identifying the benefits and risks of emerging treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a qualitative study. Patient. 2015;8(1):85–92.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Nalysnyk L, Cid-Ruzafa J, Rotella P, Esser D. Incidence and prevalence of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: review of the literature. Eur Respir Rev. 2012;21(126):355–61.CrossRefPubMed Nalysnyk L, Cid-Ruzafa J, Rotella P, Esser D. Incidence and prevalence of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: review of the literature. Eur Respir Rev. 2012;21(126):355–61.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Verhave JC, Wetzels JF, van de Kar NC. Novel aspects of atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome and the role of eculizumab. Nephrol Dial Transpl. 2014;29(Suppl 4):iv131–41.CrossRef Verhave JC, Wetzels JF, van de Kar NC. Novel aspects of atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome and the role of eculizumab. Nephrol Dial Transpl. 2014;29(Suppl 4):iv131–41.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Baskin E, Gulleroglu K, Kantar A, Bayrakci U, Ozkaya O. Success of eculizumab in the treatment of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. Pediatr Nephrol. 2015;30(5):783–9.CrossRefPubMed Baskin E, Gulleroglu K, Kantar A, Bayrakci U, Ozkaya O. Success of eculizumab in the treatment of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. Pediatr Nephrol. 2015;30(5):783–9.CrossRefPubMed
41.
go back to reference Zuber J, Fakhouri F, Roumenina LT, Loirat C, Fremeaux-Bacchi V. Use of eculizumab for atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome and C3 glomerulopathies. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2012;8(11):643–57.CrossRefPubMed Zuber J, Fakhouri F, Roumenina LT, Loirat C, Fremeaux-Bacchi V. Use of eculizumab for atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome and C3 glomerulopathies. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2012;8(11):643–57.CrossRefPubMed
42.
go back to reference Sav A, King MA, Whitty JA, Kendall E, McMillan SS, Kelly F, et al. Burden of treatment for chronic illness: a concept analysis and review of the literature. Health Expect. 2015;18(3):312–24.CrossRefPubMed Sav A, King MA, Whitty JA, Kendall E, McMillan SS, Kelly F, et al. Burden of treatment for chronic illness: a concept analysis and review of the literature. Health Expect. 2015;18(3):312–24.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL. Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(9):1263.CrossRefPubMed Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL. Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(9):1263.CrossRefPubMed
44.
go back to reference Willis GB, Artino AR. What do our respondents think we’re asking? Using cognitive interviewing to improve medical education surveys. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5(3):353–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Willis GB, Artino AR. What do our respondents think we’re asking? Using cognitive interviewing to improve medical education surveys. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5(3):353–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
45.
go back to reference Atkinson MJ, Stewart WC, Fain JM, Stewart JA, Dhawan R, Mozaffari E, et al. A new measure of patient satisfaction with ocular hypotensive medications: the Treatment Satisfaction Survey for Intraocular Pressure (TSS-IOP). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:67.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Atkinson MJ, Stewart WC, Fain JM, Stewart JA, Dhawan R, Mozaffari E, et al. A new measure of patient satisfaction with ocular hypotensive medications: the Treatment Satisfaction Survey for Intraocular Pressure (TSS-IOP). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:67.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
go back to reference Barber BL, Strahlman ER, Laibovitz R, Guess HA, Reines SA. Validation of a questionnaire for comparing the tolerability of ophthalmic medications. Ophthalmology. 1997;104(2):334–42.CrossRefPubMed Barber BL, Strahlman ER, Laibovitz R, Guess HA, Reines SA. Validation of a questionnaire for comparing the tolerability of ophthalmic medications. Ophthalmology. 1997;104(2):334–42.CrossRefPubMed
47.
go back to reference Flood EM, Beusterien KM, Green H, Shikiar R, Baran RW, Amonkar MM, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the Osteoporosis Patient Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (OPSAT-Q), a novel measure to assess satisfaction with bisphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal women. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Flood EM, Beusterien KM, Green H, Shikiar R, Baran RW, Amonkar MM, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the Osteoporosis Patient Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (OPSAT-Q), a novel measure to assess satisfaction with bisphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal women. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
go back to reference Vernon MK, Revicki DA, Awad AG, Dirani R, Panish J, Canuso CM, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) to assess satisfaction with antipsychotic medication among schizophrenia patients. Schizophr Res. 2010;118(1–3):271–8.CrossRefPubMed Vernon MK, Revicki DA, Awad AG, Dirani R, Panish J, Canuso CM, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) to assess satisfaction with antipsychotic medication among schizophrenia patients. Schizophr Res. 2010;118(1–3):271–8.CrossRefPubMed
49.
go back to reference Brod M, Christensen T, Kongso JH, Bushnell DM. Examining and interpreting responsiveness of the Diabetes Medication Satisfaction measure. J Med Econ. 2009;12(4):309–16.CrossRefPubMed Brod M, Christensen T, Kongso JH, Bushnell DM. Examining and interpreting responsiveness of the Diabetes Medication Satisfaction measure. J Med Econ. 2009;12(4):309–16.CrossRefPubMed
50.
go back to reference Kimel M, Hsieh R, McCormack J, Burch SP, Revicki DA. Validation of the revised Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire (PPMQ-R): measuring satisfaction with acute migraine treatment in clinical trials. Cephalalgia. 2008;28(5):510–23.CrossRefPubMed Kimel M, Hsieh R, McCormack J, Burch SP, Revicki DA. Validation of the revised Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire (PPMQ-R): measuring satisfaction with acute migraine treatment in clinical trials. Cephalalgia. 2008;28(5):510–23.CrossRefPubMed
51.
go back to reference Campbell JL, Kiebert GM, Partridge MR. Development of the satisfaction with inhaled asthma treatment questionnaire. Eur Respir J. 2003;22(1):127–34.CrossRefPubMed Campbell JL, Kiebert GM, Partridge MR. Development of the satisfaction with inhaled asthma treatment questionnaire. Eur Respir J. 2003;22(1):127–34.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Mathias SD, Warren EH, Colwell HH, Sung JC. A new treatment satisfaction measure for asthmatics: a validation study. Qual Life Res. 2000;9(7):873–82.CrossRefPubMed Mathias SD, Warren EH, Colwell HH, Sung JC. A new treatment satisfaction measure for asthmatics: a validation study. Qual Life Res. 2000;9(7):873–82.CrossRefPubMed
53.
go back to reference Pouchot J, Trudeau E, Hellot SC, Meric G, Waeckel A, Goguel J. Development and psychometric validation of a new patient satisfaction instrument: the osteoARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(5):1387–99.CrossRefPubMed Pouchot J, Trudeau E, Hellot SC, Meric G, Waeckel A, Goguel J. Development and psychometric validation of a new patient satisfaction instrument: the osteoARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(5):1387–99.CrossRefPubMed
54.
go back to reference Baro E, Casado A, Garcia-Cases C, Clerch L, Ribas S. Assessing satisfaction with pain medication in primary care patients: development and psychometric validation of a new measure. Clin Ther. 2004;26(7):1124–36.CrossRefPubMed Baro E, Casado A, Garcia-Cases C, Clerch L, Ribas S. Assessing satisfaction with pain medication in primary care patients: development and psychometric validation of a new measure. Clin Ther. 2004;26(7):1124–36.CrossRefPubMed
55.
go back to reference Evans CJ, Trudeau E, Mertzanis P, Marquis P, Pena BM, Wong J, et al. Development and validation of the Pain Treatment Satisfaction Scale (PTSS): a patient satisfaction questionnaire for use in patients with chronic or acute pain. Pain. 2004;112(3):254–66.CrossRefPubMed Evans CJ, Trudeau E, Mertzanis P, Marquis P, Pena BM, Wong J, et al. Development and validation of the Pain Treatment Satisfaction Scale (PTSS): a patient satisfaction questionnaire for use in patients with chronic or acute pain. Pain. 2004;112(3):254–66.CrossRefPubMed
56.
go back to reference Coyne K, Joshua-Gotlib S, Kimel M, Thompson C, Lewis A, Danilewitz M. Validation of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for Crohn’s disease (TSQ-C). Dig Dis Sci. 2005;50(2):252–8.CrossRefPubMed Coyne K, Joshua-Gotlib S, Kimel M, Thompson C, Lewis A, Danilewitz M. Validation of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for Crohn’s disease (TSQ-C). Dig Dis Sci. 2005;50(2):252–8.CrossRefPubMed
57.
go back to reference Margolis MK, Fox KM, Cerulli A, Ariely R, Kahler KH, Coyne KS. Psychometric validation of the overactive bladder satisfaction with treatment questionnaire (OAB-SAT-q). Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(5):416–22.CrossRefPubMed Margolis MK, Fox KM, Cerulli A, Ariely R, Kahler KH, Coyne KS. Psychometric validation of the overactive bladder satisfaction with treatment questionnaire (OAB-SAT-q). Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(5):416–22.CrossRefPubMed
58.
go back to reference Abetz L, Coombs JH, Keininger DL, Earle CC, Wade C, Bury-Maynard D, et al. Development of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire: item generation and content validity testing. Value Health. 2005;8(Suppl 1):S41–53.CrossRefPubMed Abetz L, Coombs JH, Keininger DL, Earle CC, Wade C, Bury-Maynard D, et al. Development of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire: item generation and content validity testing. Value Health. 2005;8(Suppl 1):S41–53.CrossRefPubMed
59.
go back to reference Atkinson MJ, Sinha A, Hass SL, Colman SS, Kumar RN, Brod M, et al. Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Atkinson MJ, Sinha A, Hass SL, Colman SS, Kumar RN, Brod M, et al. Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
60.
go back to reference Atkinson MJ, Kumar R, Cappelleri JC, Hass SL. Hierarchical construct validity of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM version II) among outpatient pharmacy consumers. Value Health. 2005;8(Suppl 1):S9–24.CrossRefPubMed Atkinson MJ, Kumar R, Cappelleri JC, Hass SL. Hierarchical construct validity of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM version II) among outpatient pharmacy consumers. Value Health. 2005;8(Suppl 1):S9–24.CrossRefPubMed
61.
go back to reference Ruiz MA, Pardo A, Rejas J, Soto J, Villasante F, Aranguren JL. Development and validation of the “Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire” (SATMED-Q). Value Health. 2008;11(5):913–26.CrossRefPubMed Ruiz MA, Pardo A, Rejas J, Soto J, Villasante F, Aranguren JL. Development and validation of the “Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire” (SATMED-Q). Value Health. 2008;11(5):913–26.CrossRefPubMed
62.
go back to reference de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.CrossRef de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.CrossRef
63.
go back to reference Kroenke K, Monahan PO, Kean J. Pragmatic characteristics of patient-reported outcome measures are important for use in clinical practice. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(9):1085–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kroenke K, Monahan PO, Kean J. Pragmatic characteristics of patient-reported outcome measures are important for use in clinical practice. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(9):1085–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
64.
go back to reference Jacobson TA, Edelman SV, Galipeau N, Shields AL, Mallya UG, Koren A, et al. Development and content validity of the Statin Experience Assessment Questionnaire (SEAQ)(c). Patient. [Epub 15 Dec 2016]. doi:10.1007/s40271-016-0211-y. Jacobson TA, Edelman SV, Galipeau N, Shields AL, Mallya UG, Koren A, et al. Development and content validity of the Statin Experience Assessment Questionnaire (SEAQ)(c). Patient. [Epub 15 Dec 2016]. doi:10.​1007/​s40271-016-0211-y.
65.
go back to reference Chen J, Ou L, Hollis SJ. A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:211.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chen J, Ou L, Hollis SJ. A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:211.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
66.
go back to reference Santana MJ, Feeny D. Framework to assess the effects of using patient-reported outcome measures in chronic care management. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(5):1505–13.CrossRefPubMed Santana MJ, Feeny D. Framework to assess the effects of using patient-reported outcome measures in chronic care management. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(5):1505–13.CrossRefPubMed
67.
go back to reference Drummond MF. Challenges in the economic evaluation of orphan drugs. Eurohealth. 2008;14(2):16–7. Drummond MF. Challenges in the economic evaluation of orphan drugs. Eurohealth. 2008;14(2):16–7.
Metadata
Title
Development and Pretesting of a Questionnaire to Assess Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM Questionnaire)
Authors
Merel L. Kimman
Adrienne H. Rotteveel
Marlies Wijsenbeek
Rémy Mostard
Nelleke C. Tak
Xana van Jaarsveld
Marjolein Storm
Kioa L. Wijnsma
Marielle Gelens
Nicole C. A. J. van de Kar
Jack Wetzels
Carmen D. Dirksen
Publication date
01-10-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 5/2017
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0234-z

Other articles of this Issue 5/2017

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 5/2017 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine