학술논문
The diabetes management experiences questionnaire: Psychometric validation among adults with type 1 diabetes.
Document Type
Article
Author
Hendrieckx, Christel; Husin, Hanafi M.; Russell‐Green, Sienna; Halliday, Jennifer A.; Lam, Benjamin; Trawley, Steven; McAuley, Sybil A.; Bach, Leon A.; Burt, Morton G.; Cohen, Neale D.; Colman, Peter G.; Holmes‐Walker, D. Jane; Jenkins, Alicia J.; Lee, Melissa H.; McCallum, Roland W.; Stranks, Steve N.; Sundararajan, Vijaya; Jones, Tim W.; O'Neal, David N.; Speight, Jane
Source
Subject
*RELIABILITY (Personality trait)
*GLYCOSYLATED hemoglobin
*RESEARCH methodology evaluation
*SELF-management (Psychology)
*TYPE 1 diabetes
*PATIENT satisfaction
*PSYCHOMETRICS
*PATIENTS' attitudes
*MULTITRAIT multimethod techniques
*QUESTIONNAIRES
*PSYCHOSOCIAL factors
*DESCRIPTIVE statistics
*RESEARCH funding
*PEOPLE with diabetes
*SECONDARY analysis
*PSYCHOLOGICAL stress
*EVALUATION
*ADULTS
RESEARCH evaluation
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Language
ISSN
0742-3071
Abstract
Aims: To examine the psychometric properties of the Diabetes Management Experiences Questionnaire (DME‐Q). Adapted from the validated Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire, the DME‐Q captures satisfaction with diabetes management irrespective of treatment modalities. Methods: The DME‐Q was completed by adults with type 1 diabetes as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing hybrid closed loop (HCL) to standard therapy. Most psychometric properties were examined with pre‐randomization data (n = 149); responsiveness was examined using baseline and 26‐week follow‐up data (n = 120). Results: Pre‐randomization, participants' mean age was 44 ± 12 years, 52% were women. HbA1c was 61 ± 11 mmol/mol (7.8 ± 1.0%), diabetes duration was 24 ± 12 years and 47% used an insulin pump prior to the trial. A forced three‐factor analysis revealed three expected domains, that is, 'Convenience', 'Effectiveness' and 'Intrusiveness', and a forced one‐factor solution was also satisfactory. Internal consistency reliability was strong for the three subscales (α range = 0.74–0.84) and 'Total satisfaction' (α = 0.85). Convergent validity was demonstrated with moderate correlations between DME‐Q 'Total satisfaction' and diabetes distress (PAID: rs = −0.57) and treatment satisfaction (DTSQ; rs = 0.58). Divergent validity was demonstrated with a weak correlation with prospective/retrospective memory (PRMQ: rs = −0.16 and − 0.13 respectively). Responsiveness was demonstrated, as participants randomized to HCL had higher 'Effectiveness' and 'Total satisfaction' scores than those randomized to standard therapy. Conclusions: The 22‐item DME‐Q is a brief, acceptable, reliable measure with satisfactory structural and construct validity, which is responsive to intervention. The DME‐Q is likely to be useful for evaluation of new pharmaceutical agents and technologies in research and clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]