Cargando…

Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)

INTRODUCTION: The Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) was designed to assess patient preference between two non-insulin injection devices. In a recent crossover study, people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) completed the DID-PQ after performing mock injections with two non-insulin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boye, Kristina S., Matza, Louis S., Currie, Brooke M., Coyne, Karin S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7726085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33296064
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x
_version_ 1783620811942264832
author Boye, Kristina S.
Matza, Louis S.
Currie, Brooke M.
Coyne, Karin S.
author_facet Boye, Kristina S.
Matza, Louis S.
Currie, Brooke M.
Coyne, Karin S.
author_sort Boye, Kristina S.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) was designed to assess patient preference between two non-insulin injection devices. In a recent crossover study, people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) completed the DID-PQ after performing mock injections with two non-insulin injection devices. The purpose of the current analysis was to use these data to assess construct validity of the DID-PQ and demonstrate one way to test whether there is a significant preference for one injection device over another. METHODS: Data were from an open-label, multicenter, randomized, crossover study assessing preference between the dulaglutide and semaglutide injection pens. In addition to the 10-item DID-PQ, people with T2D completed a global item assessing overall preference. DID-PQ responses were compared to the global preference item (percent agreement, Gwet’s AC1, prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa [PABAK]). For each item of the DID-PQ, a two-sided binomial test assessed whether the difference in preference was statistically significant. RESULTS: The sample included 310 participants (48.4% female; mean age = 60.0). The DID-PQ had minimal missing data. There was strong concordance (percent agreement > 78%) between the global preference item and all DID-PQ items except item 6, which assesses preference related to needle size (59.7%). The Gwet AC1 and PABAK statistics also indicated strong agreement between the global preference item and all DID-PQ items except item 6. There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.0001) in preference on every DID-PQ item, with more participants preferring the dulaglutide device. DISCUSSION: Patient preference has been recommended as a “major factor driving the choice of medication” in a consensus report by the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Current findings suggest that the DID-PQ may be a useful tool for providing insight into preferences of people with T2D using non-insulin injectable medication.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7726085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77260852020-12-17 Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) Boye, Kristina S. Matza, Louis S. Currie, Brooke M. Coyne, Karin S. J Patient Rep Outcomes Short Report INTRODUCTION: The Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) was designed to assess patient preference between two non-insulin injection devices. In a recent crossover study, people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) completed the DID-PQ after performing mock injections with two non-insulin injection devices. The purpose of the current analysis was to use these data to assess construct validity of the DID-PQ and demonstrate one way to test whether there is a significant preference for one injection device over another. METHODS: Data were from an open-label, multicenter, randomized, crossover study assessing preference between the dulaglutide and semaglutide injection pens. In addition to the 10-item DID-PQ, people with T2D completed a global item assessing overall preference. DID-PQ responses were compared to the global preference item (percent agreement, Gwet’s AC1, prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa [PABAK]). For each item of the DID-PQ, a two-sided binomial test assessed whether the difference in preference was statistically significant. RESULTS: The sample included 310 participants (48.4% female; mean age = 60.0). The DID-PQ had minimal missing data. There was strong concordance (percent agreement > 78%) between the global preference item and all DID-PQ items except item 6, which assesses preference related to needle size (59.7%). The Gwet AC1 and PABAK statistics also indicated strong agreement between the global preference item and all DID-PQ items except item 6. There was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.0001) in preference on every DID-PQ item, with more participants preferring the dulaglutide device. DISCUSSION: Patient preference has been recommended as a “major factor driving the choice of medication” in a consensus report by the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Current findings suggest that the DID-PQ may be a useful tool for providing insight into preferences of people with T2D using non-insulin injectable medication. Springer International Publishing 2020-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7726085/ /pubmed/33296064 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Short Report
Boye, Kristina S.
Matza, Louis S.
Currie, Brooke M.
Coyne, Karin S.
Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)
title Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)
title_full Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)
title_fullStr Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)
title_full_unstemmed Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)
title_short Validity and analysis of the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)
title_sort validity and analysis of the diabetes injection device preference questionnaire (did-pq)
topic Short Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7726085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33296064
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00266-x
work_keys_str_mv AT boyekristinas validityandanalysisofthediabetesinjectiondevicepreferencequestionnairedidpq
AT matzalouiss validityandanalysisofthediabetesinjectiondevicepreferencequestionnairedidpq
AT curriebrookem validityandanalysisofthediabetesinjectiondevicepreferencequestionnairedidpq
AT coynekarins validityandanalysisofthediabetesinjectiondevicepreferencequestionnairedidpq