BACKGROUND: Medication non-adherence is a common issue in chronic illness. The World Health Organization has recognized a need for a valid and reliable method of measuring adherence to understand and mitigate non-adherence. This study aimed to psychometrically evaluate the English version of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©), a questionnaire designed to assess patient-reported medication adherence across multiple therapy areas, in patients with Osteoarthritis (OA). METHODOLOGY: Data from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific ProgrammeTM, a survey of physicians and their consulting adult patients with OA conducted in the United States, November 2020 to March 2021, was used to assess the psychometric properties of the ADAQ. Patients completed the ADAQ, Adherence to Refills and Medication Scale (ARMS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and EQ-5D-3L. The measurement model of the 13-item ADAQ was assessed and refined using latent variable modelling (Multiple Indicator Multiple Cause, confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses, item response theory, Mokken scaling, and bifactor analyses). Correlational analyses (Spearman's rank and polyserial as appropriate) with ARMS, WOMAC, and EQ-5D-3L scores assessed construct validity. Anchor- and distribution-based analyses were performed to estimate between-group clinically important differences (CID). RESULTS: Overall, 723 patients were included in this analysis (54.5% female, 69.0% aged ≥ 60). Latent variable modelling indicated a unidimensional reflective model was appropriate, with a bifactor model confirming an 11-item essentially unidimensional score. Items 12 and 13 were excluded from scoring as they measured a different concept. The ADAQ had high internal reliability with omega hierarchical and Cronbach's alpha coefficients of 0.89 and 0.97, respectively. Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations with items of the ARMS, and physician-reported adherence and compliance. Mean differences in ADAQ score between high and low adherence groups yielded CID estimates between 0.49 and 1.05 points, with a correlation-weighted average of 0.81 points. CONCLUSION: This scoring model showed strong construct validity and internal consistency reliability when assessing medication adherence in OA. Future work should focus on confirming validity across a range of disease areas.

• MeSH
• Medication Adherence * psychology   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Assessment of Medication Adherence * MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Osteoarthritis * drug therapy   psychology   MeSH
• Surveys and Questionnaires MeSH
• Psychometrics * methods   MeSH
• Reproducibility of Results MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Geographicals
• United States MeSH

BACKGROUND: The Near Visual Acuity Questionnaire Presbyopia (NAVQ-P) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure that was developed in a phakic presbyopia population to assess near vision function impacts. The study refined and explored the psychometric properties and score interpretability of the NAVQ-P and additional PRO items assessing near vision correction independence (NVCI), near vision satisfaction (NVS), and near vision correction preference (NVCP). METHODS: This was a psychometric validation study conducted using PRO data collected as part of a Phase IIb clinical trial (CUN8R44 A2202) consisting of 235 randomized adults with presbyopia from the US, Japan, Australia, and Canada. Data collected at baseline, week 2, and months 1, 2, and 3 during the 3-month trial treatment period were included in the analyses to assess item (question) properties, NAVQ-P dimensionality and scoring, reliability, validity, and score interpretation. RESULTS: Item responses were distributed across the full response scale for most NAVQ-P and additional PRO items. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the pre-defined unidimensional structure and calculation of a NAVQ-P total score as a measure of near vision function. Item deletion informed by item response distributions, dimensionality analyses, item response theory, and previous qualitative findings, including clinical input, supported retention of 14 NAVQ-P items. The 14-item NAVQ-P total score had excellent internal consistency (α = 0.979) and high test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients > = 0.898). There was good evidence of construct-related validity for all PROs supported by strong correlations with concurrent measures. Excellent results for known-groups validity and ability to detect change analyses were also demonstrated. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods supported interpretation of scores through generation of group-level and within-individual estimates of meaningful change thresholds. A meaningful within-patient change in the range of 8-15-point improvement on the NAVQ-P total score (score range 0-42) was recommended, including a more specific responder definition of 10-point improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The NAVQ-P, NVCI, and NVS are valid and reliable instruments which have the ability to detect change over time. Findings strongly support the use of these measures as outcome assessments in clinical/research studies and in clinical practice in the presbyopia population.

• MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Patient Reported Outcome Measures MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Myopia * MeSH
• Presbyopia * diagnosis   MeSH
• Psychometrics MeSH
• Reproducibility of Results MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Geographicals
• Australia MeSH

• MeSH
• Mental Disorders MeSH
• Epilepsy MeSH
• Psychiatry MeSH
• Publication type
• Monograph MeSH

• Conspectus
• Psychiatrie
• NML Fields
• psychiatrie