Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

The patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS) questionnaire: translation and cultural adaption of the Norwegian version

Authors: Anne Marie Lunde Husebø, Ingvild Margreta Morken, Kristina Sundt Eriksen, Oda Karin Nordfonn

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Noncommunicable diseases represents long term medical conditions, which often puts the patients under enormous demands when following treatment, exposing them to experiencing treatment burden. The Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-Management (PETS) questionnaire was developed as a patient-reported measure to identify treatment burden of chronic illness, using modern measurement theory and tested in a variety of settings. Developed in English, this set of measures had not been previously translated into Norwegian. The objective of this study was to develop a Norwegian version of the PETS and to pretest the translated measures through a cognitive debriefing methodology.

Methods

A rigorous translation approach was applied, guided by Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy methodology. Bilingual teams from Norway and the United States reviewed the translation to develop a provisional version, which was evaluated for test content validity with cognitive interviews by probing 12 native Norwegian patients with noncommunicable diseases. The interviews applied both concurrent and retrospective verbal probing techniques, guided by a question route. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using systematic text condensation.

Results

Assessment of translatability identified the need for cultural adaptation on several core words, balanced with the need to keep close to the original literal meaning. Seven patients with colorectal cancer and five patients with heart failure participated in cognitive testing of the Norwegian version of the PETS. The analytical process of the cognitive interviews identified two emergent main themes, ‘comprehension and readability’ and ‘relevance of the PETS’, with seven corresponding subthemes. Most items, response options and instructions were well understood by the patients. Revisions were made concerning cultural relevance.

Conclusions

PETS items were semantically equivalent to the original. The patients with colorectal cancer and heart failure were able to comprehend the PETS and found it to express their experience with treatment burden in chronic illness. Future work will focus on psychometric construct validation and reliability testing of the PETS.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Feltner C, Jones CD, Cenè CW, Zheng ZJ, Sueta CA, Coker-Schwimmer EJL, et al. Transitional care interventions to prevent readmissions for persons with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:774–84.CrossRef Feltner C, Jones CD, Cenè CW, Zheng ZJ, Sueta CA, Coker-Schwimmer EJL, et al. Transitional care interventions to prevent readmissions for persons with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:774–84.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Jakobsson J, Idvall E, Kumlien C. The lived experience of recovery during the first 6 months after colorectal cancer surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26:4498–505.CrossRef Jakobsson J, Idvall E, Kumlien C. The lived experience of recovery during the first 6 months after colorectal cancer surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26:4498–505.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Olano-Lizarraga M, Oroviogoicoechea C, Errasti-Ibarrondo B, Saracíbar-Razquin M. The personal experience of living with chronic heart failure: a qualitative meta-synthesis of the literature. J Clin Nurs. 2016;25:2413–29.CrossRef Olano-Lizarraga M, Oroviogoicoechea C, Errasti-Ibarrondo B, Saracíbar-Razquin M. The personal experience of living with chronic heart failure: a qualitative meta-synthesis of the literature. J Clin Nurs. 2016;25:2413–29.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Kotronoulas G, Papadopoulou C, Burns-Cunningham K, Simpson M, Maguire R. A systematic review of the supportive care needs of people living with and beyond cancer of the colon and/or rectum. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2017;29:60–70.CrossRef Kotronoulas G, Papadopoulou C, Burns-Cunningham K, Simpson M, Maguire R. A systematic review of the supportive care needs of people living with and beyond cancer of the colon and/or rectum. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2017;29:60–70.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Sav A, Kendall E, McMillan SS, Kelly F, Whitty JA, King MA, Wheeler AJ. ‘You say treatment, I say hard work’: treatment burden among people with chronic illness and their careers in Australia. Health Soc Care Commun. 2013;21:665–74. Sav A, Kendall E, McMillan SS, Kelly F, Whitty JA, King MA, Wheeler AJ. ‘You say treatment, I say hard work’: treatment burden among people with chronic illness and their careers in Australia. Health Soc Care Commun. 2013;21:665–74.
7.
go back to reference May CR, Eton DT, Boehmer K, Gallacher K, Hunt K, MacDonald S, et al. Rethinking the patient: using burden of treatment theory to understand the changing dynamics of illness. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:281.CrossRef May CR, Eton DT, Boehmer K, Gallacher K, Hunt K, MacDonald S, et al. Rethinking the patient: using burden of treatment theory to understand the changing dynamics of illness. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:281.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Tran VT, Montori VM, Eton DT, Baruch D, Falissard B, Ravaud P. Development and description of measurement properties of an instrument to assess treatment burden among patients with multiple chronic conditions. BMC Med. 2012;10:68.CrossRef Tran VT, Montori VM, Eton DT, Baruch D, Falissard B, Ravaud P. Development and description of measurement properties of an instrument to assess treatment burden among patients with multiple chronic conditions. BMC Med. 2012;10:68.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Tran VT, Barnes C, Montori VM, Falissard B, Ravaud P. Taxonomy of the burden of treatment: a multi-country web-based qualitative study of patients with chronic conditions. BMC Med. 2015;13:115.CrossRef Tran VT, Barnes C, Montori VM, Falissard B, Ravaud P. Taxonomy of the burden of treatment: a multi-country web-based qualitative study of patients with chronic conditions. BMC Med. 2015;13:115.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Schneider EB, Hyder O, Brooke BS, Efron J, Cameron JL, Edil BH, et al. Patient readmission and mortality after colorectal surgery for colon cancer: impact of length of stay relative to other clinical factors. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214:390–8.CrossRef Schneider EB, Hyder O, Brooke BS, Efron J, Cameron JL, Edil BH, et al. Patient readmission and mortality after colorectal surgery for colon cancer: impact of length of stay relative to other clinical factors. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214:390–8.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Eton DT, Ramalho de Oliveira D, Egginton JS, Ridgeway JL, Odell L, May CR, Montori VM. Building a measurement framework of burden of treatment in complex patients with chronic conditions: a qualitative study. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2012;3:39–49.CrossRef Eton DT, Ramalho de Oliveira D, Egginton JS, Ridgeway JL, Odell L, May CR, Montori VM. Building a measurement framework of burden of treatment in complex patients with chronic conditions: a qualitative study. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2012;3:39–49.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Eton DT, Ridgeway JL, Egginton JS, Tiedje K, Linzer M, Boehm DH, et al. Finalizing a measurement framework for the burden of treatment in complex patients with chronic conditions. Patient Relat Outcome Measures. 2015;6:117–26.CrossRef Eton DT, Ridgeway JL, Egginton JS, Tiedje K, Linzer M, Boehm DH, et al. Finalizing a measurement framework for the burden of treatment in complex patients with chronic conditions. Patient Relat Outcome Measures. 2015;6:117–26.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Eton DT, Yost KJ, Lai JS, Ridgeway JL, Egginton JS, Rosedahl JK, et al. Development and validation of the patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS): a patient-reported measure of treatment burden. Qual Life Res. 2017;26:489–503.CrossRef Eton DT, Yost KJ, Lai JS, Ridgeway JL, Egginton JS, Rosedahl JK, et al. Development and validation of the patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS): a patient-reported measure of treatment burden. Qual Life Res. 2017;26:489–503.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25:3186–91.CrossRef Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25:3186–91.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ. A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof. 2005;28:212–32.CrossRef Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ. A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof. 2005;28:212–32.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Rogers EA, Yost KJ, Rosedahl JK, Linzer M, Boehm DH, Thakur A, et al. Validating the patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS), a patient-reported measure of treatment burden, in people with diabetes. Patient Relat Outcome Measures. 2017;8:143–56.CrossRef Rogers EA, Yost KJ, Rosedahl JK, Linzer M, Boehm DH, Thakur A, et al. Validating the patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS), a patient-reported measure of treatment burden, in people with diabetes. Patient Relat Outcome Measures. 2017;8:143–56.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing: a “how to” guide. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute; 1999. Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing: a “how to” guide. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute; 1999.
18.
go back to reference Tourangeau R. Cognitive sciences and survey methods. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: Building a bridge between disciplines. 1984;15:73–100. Tourangeau R. Cognitive sciences and survey methods. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: Building a bridge between disciplines. 1984;15:73–100.
19.
go back to reference Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:229–38.CrossRef Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:229–38.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference American Educational Research Association; American Psychological Assocoation; National Council of Measurement in Education. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (US). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association; 2014. American Educational Research Association; American Psychological Assocoation; National Council of Measurement in Education. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (US). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association; 2014.
21.
go back to reference Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: a strategy for qualitative analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40:795–805.CrossRef Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: a strategy for qualitative analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40:795–805.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Brislin RW. The wording and trasnslation of research instruments. In: Lonner WL, Berry JW, editors. Field methods in cross-cultural research. Newbury Park: Sage; 1986. p. 137–64. Brislin RW. The wording and trasnslation of research instruments. In: Lonner WL, Berry JW, editors. Field methods in cross-cultural research. Newbury Park: Sage; 1986. p. 137–64.
23.
go back to reference Setia MS. Methodology series module 8: designing questionnaires and clinical record forms. Indian J Dermatol. 2017;62:130–4.CrossRef Setia MS. Methodology series module 8: designing questionnaires and clinical record forms. Indian J Dermatol. 2017;62:130–4.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Brislin RW. Comparative research methodology: cross-cultural studies. Int J Psychol. 1976;11:215–29.CrossRef Brislin RW. Comparative research methodology: cross-cultural studies. Int J Psychol. 1976;11:215–29.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: principles and methods. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: principles and methods. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.
26.
go back to reference Sturges JE, Hanrahan KJ. Comparing telephone and face-to-face qualitative interviewing: a research note. Qual Res. 2004;4:107–18.CrossRef Sturges JE, Hanrahan KJ. Comparing telephone and face-to-face qualitative interviewing: a research note. Qual Res. 2004;4:107–18.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Liu Y, Hinds PS, Wang J, Correia H, Du S, Ding J, et al. Translation and linguistic validation of the pediatric patient-reported outcomes measurement information system measures into simplified Chinese using cognitive interviewing methodology. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36:368–76.CrossRef Liu Y, Hinds PS, Wang J, Correia H, Du S, Ding J, et al. Translation and linguistic validation of the pediatric patient-reported outcomes measurement information system measures into simplified Chinese using cognitive interviewing methodology. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36:368–76.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Conrad FG, Blair J. Data quality in cognitive interviews: the case of verbal reports. In: Groves RM, Kalton G, Rao J, Schwarz N, Skinner C, Presser S, et al., editors. Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2004. p. 67–87.CrossRef Conrad FG, Blair J. Data quality in cognitive interviews: the case of verbal reports. In: Groves RM, Kalton G, Rao J, Schwarz N, Skinner C, Presser S, et al., editors. Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2004. p. 67–87.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS) questionnaire: translation and cultural adaption of the Norwegian version
Authors
Anne Marie Lunde Husebø
Ingvild Margreta Morken
Kristina Sundt Eriksen
Oda Karin Nordfonn
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0612-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2018 Go to the issue