Cargando…

Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment

Purpose: The Treatment Effectiveness Assessment (TEA) is a patient-centered instrument for evaluating treatment progress and recovery from substance use disorders, including opioid use disorder (OUD). We assessed the TEA’s reliability and validity and determined minimal clinically important differen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ling, Walter, Nadipelli, Vijay R, Solem, Caitlyn T, Farabee, David, Ronquest, Naoko A, Perrochet, Brian, Learned, Susan M, Deshpande, Chinmay G, Heidbreder, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6556477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31239805
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/SAR.S198361
_version_ 1783425333105524736
author Ling, Walter
Nadipelli, Vijay R
Solem, Caitlyn T
Farabee, David
Ronquest, Naoko A
Perrochet, Brian
Learned, Susan M
Deshpande, Chinmay G
Heidbreder, Christian
author_facet Ling, Walter
Nadipelli, Vijay R
Solem, Caitlyn T
Farabee, David
Ronquest, Naoko A
Perrochet, Brian
Learned, Susan M
Deshpande, Chinmay G
Heidbreder, Christian
author_sort Ling, Walter
collection PubMed
description Purpose: The Treatment Effectiveness Assessment (TEA) is a patient-centered instrument for evaluating treatment progress and recovery from substance use disorders, including opioid use disorder (OUD). We assessed the TEA’s reliability and validity and determined minimal clinically important differences (MIDs) in participants with moderate to severe OUD. Patients and methods: The TEA measures change in four single-item domains (substance use, health, lifestyle, community involvement) from treatment initiation across the duration of a treatment program. Self-reported responses range from 1 (“none or not much”) to 10 (“much better”) with items summed to a total score ranging from 4–40. We assessed floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, known-groups validity (ANOVA stratified by current health status [36-Item Short Form Health Survey item 1]), convergent/divergent validity, and MIDs using data from a phase 3, open-label clinical trial of buprenorphine extended-release monthly injection for subcutaneous use (BUP-XR). Participants with OUD completed the TEA at screening and before monthly injections for up to 12 months. Results: Among 410 participants (mean age 38 years; 64% male), the mean baseline (pre-injection 1) TEA total score was 25.4 (SD 9.7), with <10% of participants at the measure floor and 10%–20% at the ceiling across domains. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach’s α=0.90), with marginal test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient =0.69). Mean TEA total score consistently increased from baseline (n=410; mean 25.4 [SD 9.7]) to end of study (n=337; 35.0 [6.7]) and differentiated between current health status groups (P<0.001); it was weakly correlated with other measures of health-related quality of life/severity. MIDs ranged from 5–8 for the TEA total score across anchor- and distribution-based approaches. Conclusion: The TEA exhibited acceptable reliability and validity in a cohort of participants with moderate to severe OUD treated with BUP-XR. Given its brevity and psychometric properties, the TEA is a promising tool for use in clinical practice and research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6556477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65564772019-06-25 Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment Ling, Walter Nadipelli, Vijay R Solem, Caitlyn T Farabee, David Ronquest, Naoko A Perrochet, Brian Learned, Susan M Deshpande, Chinmay G Heidbreder, Christian Subst Abuse Rehabil Original Research Purpose: The Treatment Effectiveness Assessment (TEA) is a patient-centered instrument for evaluating treatment progress and recovery from substance use disorders, including opioid use disorder (OUD). We assessed the TEA’s reliability and validity and determined minimal clinically important differences (MIDs) in participants with moderate to severe OUD. Patients and methods: The TEA measures change in four single-item domains (substance use, health, lifestyle, community involvement) from treatment initiation across the duration of a treatment program. Self-reported responses range from 1 (“none or not much”) to 10 (“much better”) with items summed to a total score ranging from 4–40. We assessed floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, known-groups validity (ANOVA stratified by current health status [36-Item Short Form Health Survey item 1]), convergent/divergent validity, and MIDs using data from a phase 3, open-label clinical trial of buprenorphine extended-release monthly injection for subcutaneous use (BUP-XR). Participants with OUD completed the TEA at screening and before monthly injections for up to 12 months. Results: Among 410 participants (mean age 38 years; 64% male), the mean baseline (pre-injection 1) TEA total score was 25.4 (SD 9.7), with <10% of participants at the measure floor and 10%–20% at the ceiling across domains. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach’s α=0.90), with marginal test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient =0.69). Mean TEA total score consistently increased from baseline (n=410; mean 25.4 [SD 9.7]) to end of study (n=337; 35.0 [6.7]) and differentiated between current health status groups (P<0.001); it was weakly correlated with other measures of health-related quality of life/severity. MIDs ranged from 5–8 for the TEA total score across anchor- and distribution-based approaches. Conclusion: The TEA exhibited acceptable reliability and validity in a cohort of participants with moderate to severe OUD treated with BUP-XR. Given its brevity and psychometric properties, the TEA is a promising tool for use in clinical practice and research. Dove 2019-06-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6556477/ /pubmed/31239805 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/SAR.S198361 Text en © 2019 Ling et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Ling, Walter
Nadipelli, Vijay R
Solem, Caitlyn T
Farabee, David
Ronquest, Naoko A
Perrochet, Brian
Learned, Susan M
Deshpande, Chinmay G
Heidbreder, Christian
Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment
title Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment
title_full Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment
title_fullStr Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment
title_full_unstemmed Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment
title_short Measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the Treatment Effectiveness Assessment
title_sort measuring recovery in opioid use disorder: clinical utility and psychometric properties of the treatment effectiveness assessment
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6556477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31239805
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/SAR.S198361
work_keys_str_mv AT lingwalter measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT nadipellivijayr measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT solemcaitlynt measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT farabeedavid measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT ronquestnaokoa measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT perrochetbrian measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT learnedsusanm measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT deshpandechinmayg measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment
AT heidbrederchristian measuringrecoveryinopioidusedisorderclinicalutilityandpsychometricpropertiesofthetreatmenteffectivenessassessment