Abstract

A self-administered 11 item vascular access specific quality of life measure (VASQoL) was previously derived from detailed qualitative interviews with adult patients with kidney failure who have experienced vascular access using the Capabilities Approach as a theoretical base. This study reports the psychometric validation of the VASQoL measure including its reliability, content validity and responsiveness to change. Cognitive interviews were conducted with 23 adult patients with kidney failure after completion of the VASQoL measure. Focus group discussion with a vascular access professional multidisciplinary team was undertaken (n = 8) and subsequently a further 101 adult kidney failure patients with vascular access (TCVC, AVF or AVG) completed the digital VASQoL measure, EQ-5D and SF-36 questionnaires in a longitudinal study with prospectively recorded vascular access events. Transcript analysis of cognitive interviews after VASQoL completion indicated that the content was comprehensive and well understood by participants. Assessment of Internal reliability for the VASQoL measure was high (Cronbach's alpha 0.858). Test-retest reliability of the overall VASQoL measure was high (intra class correlation coefficient 0.916). In those patients who experienced a vascular access event, significant differences were observed in paired analysis of the VASQoL physical domain questions and vascular access function domain questions and in the EQ-5D usual activities, pain and anxiety domains. In those with no vascular access event, variation was observed in longitudinal analysis in VASQoL questions relating to worry about VA function and capability domains, whilst no variation was observed in the EQ5D measure. The VASQoL measure has good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity and responsiveness to change for clinically relevant vascular access outcomes. This provides a validated, vascular access specific quality of life measure that can be used in future trials of vascular access, evaluation of new technologies and routine use as a patient reported outcome measure (PROM).

Highlights

  • Creation and maintenance of vascular access (VA) for haemodialysis contributes significantly to the burden of hospital investigations, admissions and procedures for patients with kidney failure[2]

  • Several general and disease specific quality of life (QoL) measures (SF-36, Kidney Disease QOL (KDQOL)-36, KDQOL-SF) have been used in relation to vascular access, this has mainly been on a cross sectional basis with comparison between vascular access type (AVG, AVF and TCVC) 8-12

  • The aim of this study is to present the psychometric validation of the Vascular Access Specific Quality of Life Measure (VASQoL) measure including its reliability, content validity and responsiveness to change

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Creation and maintenance of vascular access (VA) for haemodialysis contributes significantly to the burden of hospital investigations, admissions and procedures for patients with kidney failure[2]. Several general and disease specific quality of life (QoL) measures (SF-36, KDQOL-36, KDQOL-SF) have been used in relation to vascular access, this has mainly been on a cross sectional basis with comparison between vascular access type (AVG, AVF and TCVC) 8-12. 14, 15 when developing the Haemodialysis Access Related Quality of life instrument (HARQ), questions from existing health related QoL measures, previous studies and review articles were used to identify potential items that were discussed in focus groups and initial cognitive assessment.[16] In addition, the psychometric properties of HARQ have not been assessed[16]. A self-administered 11 item Vascular Access Specific Quality of Life Measure (VASQoL) was previously derived from detailed qualitative interviews with adult patients with kidney failure who have experienced vascular access using the Capabilities Approach as a theoretical base[1]. This study reports the psychometric validation of the VASQoL measure including its reliability, content validity and responsiveness to change

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call