Back to Search Start Over

Response process validity of three patient reported outcome measures for people requiring kidney care: a think-aloud study using the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O

Authors :
Paul Mark Mitchell
Jemima Scott
Sabina Sanghera
Joanna Coast
Fergus Caskey
Source :
BMJ Open, Vol 10, Iss 5 (2020), BMJ Open, Mitchell, P M, Caskey, F J, Scott, J, Sanghera, S & Coast, J 2020, ' Response process validity of three patient reported outcome measures for people requiring kidney care : a think-aloud study using the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O ', BMJ Open, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. e034569 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034569
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
BMJ Publishing Group, 2020.

Abstract

ObjectivesTo determine the response process validity, feasibility of completion, acceptability and preferences for three patient-reported outcome measures that could be used in economic evaluation—the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O—in people requiring kidney care.DesignParticipants were asked to ‘think-aloud’ while completing the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O, followed by a semistructured interview. Five raters identified errors or struggles in completing the measures from the think-aloud component of the transcripts. Patient preferences for measures were extracted from the semistructured interview.SettingEligible patients were identified through a large UK secondary care renal centre.ParticipantsIn total, 30 participants were included in the study, consisting of patients attending renal outpatients for chronic kidney disease (n=18), with a functioning kidney transplant (n=6) and receiving haemodialysis (n=6).ResultsParticipants had few errors and struggles in completing the EQ-5D-5L (11% error rate, 3% struggle rate), ICECAP-A (2% error rate, 2% struggle rate) and ICECAP-O (4% error rate, 3% struggle rate). The main errors with the EQ-5D-5L were judgements that did not comply with the ‘your health today’ instruction. Comprehension errors were most prominent on ICECAP-O. Judgement errors were the only errors reported on ICECAP-A. Although the EQ-5D-5L had slightly more errors and struggles, it was the measure most preferred, with participants able to make a clearer link with EQ-5D-5L and their health condition.ConclusionsThe EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O are feasible for people requiring kidney care to complete and can be included in studies conducting economic evaluations of kidney care interventions. Further research is required to assess how health (eg, EQ-5D) and capability (eg, ICECAP) measures can be included in an economic evaluation simultaneously, as well as what ICECAP measure(s) to include when patient groups straddle the age ranges for ICECAP-A (18 years and older) and ICECAP-O (65 years and older).

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
20446055
Volume :
10
Issue :
5
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
BMJ Open
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....e5707d7e6220837f086b050823e928fc
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034569