Bradley Clare, Plowright Rosalind, Stewart John, Valentine John, Witthaus Elke
Health Psychology Research, Dept of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Oct 10;5:57. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-5-57.
The results of using status measures to identify any changes in treatment satisfaction strongly suggest a need for specific change instruments designed to overcome the ceiling effects frequently observed at baseline. Status measures may leave little room to show improvement in situations where baseline ceiling effects are observed. A change version of the DTSQ (DTSQc) is compared here with the original status (now called DTSQs) version to test the instruments' comparative ability to demonstrate change.
Two multinational, openlabel, randomised-controlled trials (one for patients with type 1 diabetes, the other for type 2) compared new, longer-acting insulin glargine with standard NPH basal insulin. The DTSQs was completed at baseline and the DTSQs and DTSQc at final visit by 351 English- and German-speaking patients. DTSQc scores were compared with change from baseline for the DTSQs, using 3-way analysis of variance, to examine Questionnaire, Treatment and Ceiling effects (i.e. baseline scores at/near ceiling).
Significant Questionnaire effects and a Questionnaire x Ceiling interaction (p < 0.001) in both trial datasets showed that the DTSQc detected more improvement in Treatment Satisfaction than the DTSQs, especially when patients had DTSQs scores at/near ceiling at baseline. Additionally, significant Treatment effects favouring insulin glargine (p < 0.001) and a Treatment x Questionnaire interaction (p < 0.019), with the DTSQc showing more benefits, were found in the type 1 trial. Results for Perceived Hyper- and Hypoglycaemia also demonstrated important differences between the questionnaires in the detection of treatment effects. Tests of effect sizes showed these differences in response to change to be significantly in favour of the DTSQc.
The DTSQc, used in conjunction with the DTSQs, overcomes the problem of ceiling effects encountered when only the status measure is used and provides a means for new treatments to show greater value than is possible with the DTSQs alone.
使用现状测量方法来识别治疗满意度的任何变化,其结果强烈表明需要专门设计的变化测量工具,以克服在基线时经常观察到的天花板效应。在观察到基线天花板效应的情况下,现状测量方法可能几乎没有显示改善的空间。在此将糖尿病治疗满意度问卷(DTSQ)的变化版本(DTSQc)与原始现状版本(现称为DTSQs)进行比较,以测试这些工具展示变化的比较能力。
两项跨国、开放标签、随机对照试验(一项针对1型糖尿病患者,另一项针对2型糖尿病患者)将新型长效甘精胰岛素与标准中性鱼精蛋白锌胰岛素(NPH)进行了比较。351名说英语和德语的患者在基线时完成了DTSQs,在最后一次访视时完成了DTSQs和DTSQc。使用三因素方差分析将DTSQc得分与DTSQs的基线变化进行比较,以检查问卷、治疗和天花板效应(即基线得分处于或接近上限)。
在两个试验数据集中,显著的问卷效应以及问卷×天花板效应交互作用(p < 0.001)表明,DTSQc比DTSQs检测到治疗满意度有更多改善,特别是当患者基线时DTSQs得分处于或接近上限时。此外,在1型糖尿病试验中发现了有利于甘精胰岛素的显著治疗效应(p < 0.001)以及治疗×问卷效应交互作用(p < 0.019),DTSQc显示出更多益处。感知低血糖和高血糖的结果也表明,在检测治疗效果方面,两种问卷之间存在重要差异。效应大小检验表明,这些对变化的反应差异显著有利于DTSQc。
DTSQc与DTSQs结合使用,克服了仅使用现状测量方法时遇到的天花板效应问题,并为新治疗方法提供了一种手段,以显示出比单独使用DTSQs更大的价值。