The Patient Needs in Asthma Treatment (NEAT) questionnaire: Further evidence on its psychometric properties
The Patient Needs in Asthma Treatment (NEAT) questionnaire: Further evidence on its psychometric properties
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/all.13782
复制
发表时间：
2019-08-01
期刊：
影响因子：
12.4
通讯作者：
Loerbroks, Adrian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Schreitmueller, Julia;Apfelbacher, Christian;Loerbroks, Adrian
背景：基于先前的心理测量学工作，我们试图评估哮喘治疗患者需求（NEAT）问卷的有效性，对变化的反应性，3年期间的最小重要变化（MIC）（研究1）及其可靠性和最小可检测变化（SDC）在一项自述医生诊断哮喘患者的重测研究（研究2）中。方法：在研究1中，共207例患者完成了2014年和2017年的NEAT、哮喘控制测试（ACT）、哮喘生活质量问卷（AQLQ-S）和治疗满意度调查。在研究2中，共有78名患者在2018年平均间隔四周完成了两次NEAT。结果：同期效度：在线性回归中，未满足的患者需求与较差的哮喘控制（β =-0.21; P = 0.01）、哮喘相关生活质量（β = 0.31; P < 0.01）和治疗满意度（β =-0.59; P < 0.01）呈横断面相关。预测效度：基线时未满足需求越高，随访时治疗满意度越差（β =-0.28; P < 0.01），但哮喘控制和哮喘相关生活质量均不存在预测效度。通过对NEAT总分、AQLQ-S变化（beta = 0.21, P < 0.01）和治疗满意度变化（beta =-0.36, P < 0.01）的线性回归来证明对变化的响应性。MIC：在基线和随访期间，通过确定的MIC (0.301)， NEAT评分升高的患者在随访时的治疗满意度较低（beta = -0.17; P = 0.01）。通过NEAT基线与随访评分之间的相关性（例如，总分的类内相关系数= 0.78）证明了重测信度。SDC（0.384）略大于MIC。结论：NEAT是一种很有前景的评估哮喘治疗需求的工具。
Background: Building on previous psychometric work, we sought to assess the Patient Needs in Asthma Treatment (NEAT) questionnaire's validity, responsiveness to change, and the minimal important change (MIC) over a 3-year period (Study 1) and its reliability and the smallest detectable change (SDC) in a test-retest study (Study 2) among patients self-reporting physician-diagnosed asthma.Methods: In Study 1, a total of 207 patients completed a survey which included the NEAT, the Asthma Control Test (ACT), the Asthma Quality of Life QuestionnaireSydney (AQLQ-S), and a question on treatment satisfaction in 2014 and 2017. In Study 2, a total of 78 patients completed NEAT twice on average four weeks apart in 2018.Results: Concurrent validity: In linear regressions, unmet patient needs were crosssectionally associated with poorer asthma control (beta =-0.21; P = 0.01), asthma-related quality of life (QoL) (beta = 0.31; P < 0.01), and treatment satisfaction (beta =-0.59; P < 0.01). Predictive Validity: Higher unmet needs at baseline predicted worse treatment satisfaction at follow-up (beta =-0.28; P < 0.01), but neither asthma control nor asthma-related QoL. Responsiveness to change was demonstrated by linear regressions of changes in the total NEAT score and changes in AQLQ-S (beta = 0.21; P < 0.01) and treatment satisfaction (beta =-0.36; P < 0.01). MIC: Patients whose NEAT score increased between baseline and follow-up by the identified MIC (0.301) reported lower treatment satisfaction at follow-up (beta = -0.17; P = 0.01). Test-retest reliability was demonstrated by correlations between NEAT baseline and follow-up scores (eg, intra-class correlation coefficients for total score = 0.78). The SDC (0.384) was slightly larger than MIC.Conclusion: NEAT is a promising tool for assessing asthma treatment needs.