Dataset Information

Danish validation of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and findings from a population health survey: a mixed-methods study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To validate the Danish Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and obtain a population-based evaluation of treatment burden.

Design

Mixed-methods.

Setting

Danish population-based survey.

Participants

Translation by professional translators and an expert group. The scale was tested by 13 407 participants (aged ≥25 years) in treatment.

Measures

The 10-item MTBQ was translated into Danish using forward-backward translation and used in a large population health survey. A global MTBQ score was calculated and factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha assessed dimensional structure and internal consistency reliability, respectively. Spearman's rank correlations between global MTBQ scores and scores of self-rated health, health-related quality of life and the number of long-term conditions, respectively, assessed construct validity. MTBQ scores were grouped into four categories (no, low, medium, high burden) to assess interpretability and population-based evaluation of treatment burden.

Results

The scale showed high internal consistency (α=0.87), positive skewness and large floor effects. Factor analysis supported a one-dimensional structure of the scale with a three-dimensional structure as a less parsimonious alternative. The MTBQ score was negatively associated with self-rated health (r_S-0.45, p<0.0001) and health-related quality of life (r_S-0.46/-0.51, p<0.0001), and positively associated with the number of long-term conditions (r_S 0.26, p<0.0001) and perceived stress (r_S 0.44, p<0.0001). Higher treatment burden was associated with young age, male sex, high educational level, unemployment, being permanently out of work, not living with a spouse/cohabitant, living with child(ren) and long-term conditions (eg, heart attack, stroke, diabetes and mental illness).

Conclusion

The Danish MTBQ is a valid measure of treatment burden with good construct validity and high internal reliability. This is the first study to explore treatment burden at a population level and provides important evidence to policy makers and clinicians about sociodemographic groups at risk of higher treatment burden.

SUBMITTER: Pedersen MH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8724706 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Danish validation of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and findings from a population health survey: a mixed-methods study.

Pedersen Marie Hauge MH Duncan Polly P Lasgaard Mathias M Friis Karina K Salisbury Chris C Breinholt Larsen Finn F

BMJ open 20220103 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To validate the Danish Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and obtain a population-based evaluation of treatment burden.<h4>Design</h4>Mixed-methods.<h4>Setting</h4>Danish population-based survey.<h4>Participants</h4>Translation by professional translators and an expert group. The scale was tested by 13 407 participants (aged ≥25 years) in treatment.<h4>Measures</h4>The 10-item MTBQ was translated into Danish using forward-backward translation and used in a lar ...[more]

PMID: 34980626

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop and validate a new scale to assess treatment burden (the effort of looking after one's health) for patients with multimorbidity.DesignMixed-methods.SettingUK primary care.ParticipantsContent of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) was based on a literature review and views from a patient and public involvement group. Face validity was assessed through cognitive interviews. The scale was piloted and the final version was tested in 1546 adults with multimorbidity (mean age 71 years) who took part in the 3D Study, a cluster randomised controlled trial. For each question, we examined the proportion of missing data and the distribution of responses. Factor analysis, Cronbach's alpha, Spearman's rank correlations and longitudinal regression assessed dimensional structure, internal consistency reliability, construct validity and responsiveness, respectively. We assessed interpretability by grouping the global MTBQ scores into zero and tertiles (>0) and comparing participant characteristics across these categories.ResultsCognitive interviews found good acceptability and content validity. Factor analysis supported a one-factor solution. Cronbach's alpha was 0.83, indicating internal consistency reliability. The MTBQ score had a positive association with a comparator treatment burden scale (rs 0.58, P<0.0001) and with self-reported disease burden (rs 0.43, P<0.0001), and a negative association with quality of life (rs-0.36, P<0.0001) and self-rated health (rs-0.36, P<0.0001). Female participants, younger participants and participants with mental health conditions were more likely to have high treatment burden scores. Changes in MTBQ score over 9-month follow-up were associated, as expected, with changes in measures of quality of life (EuroQol five dimensions, five level questionnaire) and patient-centred care (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care).ConclusionThe MTBQ is a 10-item measure of treatment burden for patients with multimorbidity that has demonstrated good content validity, construct validity, reliability and responsiveness. It is a useful research tool for assessing the impact of interventions on treatment burden.Trial registration numberISRCTN06180958.

Project description:ObjectivesTo undertake further psychometric testing of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and examine whether reversing the scale reduced floor effects.DesignSurvey.SettingUK primary care.ParticipantsAdults (≥18 years) with three or more long-term conditions randomly selected from four general practices and invited by post.MeasuresBaseline survey: sociodemographics, MTBQ (original or version with scale reversed), Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ), four questions (from QQ-10) on ease of completing the questionnaires. Follow-up survey (1-4 weeks after baseline): MTBQ, TBQ and QQ-10. Anonymous data collected from electronic GP records: consultations (preceding 12 months) and long-term conditions. The proportion of missing data and distribution of responses were examined for the original and reversed versions of the MTBQ and the TBQ. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Spearman's rank correlation (Rs) assessed test-retest reliability and construct validity, respectively. Ease of completing the MTBQ and TBQ was compared. Interpretability was assessed by grouping global MTBQ scores into 0 and tertiles (>0).Results244 adults completed the baseline survey (consent rate 31%, mean age 70 years) and 225 completed the follow-up survey. Reversing the scale did not reduce floor effects or data skewness. The global MTBQ scores had good test-retest reliability (ICC for agreement at baseline and follow-up 0.765, 95% CI 0.702 to 0.816). Global MTBQ score was correlated with global TBQ score (Rs 0.77, p<0.001), weakly correlated with number of consultations (Rs 0.17, p=0.010), and number of different general practitioners consulted (Rs 0.23, p<0.001), but not correlated with number of long-term conditions (Rs -0.063, p=0.330). Most participants agreed that both the MTBQ and TBQ were easy to complete and included aspects they were concerned about.ConclusionThis study demonstrates test-retest reliability and ease of completion of the MTBQ and builds on a previous study demonstrating good content validity, construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire.

Project description:ObjectivePatients with multimorbidity may carry a large symptom burden. Symptoms are often what drive patients to seek healthcare and they also assist doctors with diagnosis. We examined whether symptom burden is additive in people with multimorbidity compared with people with a single morbidity.DesignThis is a longitudinal cohort study drawing on questionnaire and Danish national registry data. Multimorbidity was defined as having diagnoses from at least two out of ten morbidity groups. Associations between morbidity groups and symptom burden were estimated with multivariable models.ParticipantsIn 2012, 47 452 participants from the Danish Symptom Cohort answered a questionnaire about symptoms (36 symptoms in total), including whether symptoms were affecting their daily activities (impairment score) and their worries about present symptoms (worry score) (the highest score among the 36 symptoms on a 0-4 scale).Main outcome measureThe primary outcome was symptom burden.ResultsParticipants without morbidity reported 4.77 symptoms (out of 36 possible). Participants with one, two or three morbidities reported more symptoms than patients without morbidity (0.95 (CI 0.86 to 1.03), 1.87 (CI 1.73 to 2.01) and 2.89 (CI 2.66 to 3.12), respectively). Furthermore, they reported a higher impairment score (0.36 (0.32 to 0.39), 0.65 (0.60 to 0.70) and 1.06 (0.98 to 1.14)) and a higher worry score (0.34 (0.31 to 0.37), 0.62 (0.57 to 0.66) and 1.02 (0.94 to 1.10)) than participants without morbidity. In 45 possible combinations of multimorbidity (participants with two morbidities), interaction effects were additive in 37, 41 and 36 combinations for the number of symptoms, impairment score and worry score, respectively.ConclusionParticipants without morbidity reported a substantial number of symptoms. Having a single morbidity or multimorbidity resulted in approximately one extra symptom for each extra morbidity. In most combinations of multimorbidity, symptom burden was additive.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of headache disorders is imposing a growing burden on public health. Although most patients are seen in primary care, there is an absence of validated questionnaires designed to describe how clinicians manage patients with headache in primary care. The aim of this study was to develop a standardised headache questionnaire for use by primary care clinicians, covering diagnostic procedures, management strategies, and treatment modalities, and to assess the prevalence of consultations for headache in primary care.MethodsThe Danish Headache Questionnaire was developed through a three-phase process: a development phase, a content validation phase via iterative feedback, and a phase to create a generic English version. The Danish Headache Questionnaire includes a survey that covers diagnostic procedures, management strategies, and treatment modalities, and a logbook for tracking the prevalence of consultations for headaches. The questionnaire was tested by Danish chiropractors in primary care from 2020 to 2022.ResultsThe Danish Headache Questionnaire underwent several modifications. The survey was expanded to include questions about the Danish profession-specific guideline for managing headaches, different headache types, medical history, radiographic imaging, and potential side effects. The logbook was revised to allow for the documentation of multiple headaches and included a separate form for recording the total number of consultations. The generic version was adapted by removing or adjusting profession-specific terms and questions to suit other clinical environments. The final Danish Headache Questionnaire is available in a generic and a chiropractic-specific format, and was translated to English through a cross-cultural adaptation process.ConclusionsThe Danish Headache Questionnaire has good content validity and is a feasible tool for assessing clinicians' knowledge in managing patients with headaches and gathering data on headache prevalence in primary care. The generic version promotes a uniform approach and enables comparative analysis across different settings. The Danish Headache Questionnaire may be a valuable instrument guiding teaching a standardised assessment and for clinical assessment in primary care. Furthermore, it may have the potential to fill in gaps of knowledge which could improve the management of headache disorders in primary care.

Dataset Information

Danish validation of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and findings from a population health survey: a mixed-methods study.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Measures

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Danish validation of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and findings from a population health survey: a mixed-methods study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets