PURPOSE: To report the psychometrics of the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool (GTCAT), a new questionnaire designed to assess adherence with glaucoma therapy. METHODS: We developed the questionnaire according to the constructs of the Health Belief Model. We evaluated the questionnaire using data from a cross-sectional study with focus groups (n = 20) and a prospective observational case series (n=58). Principal components analysis provided assessment of construct validity. We repeated the questionnaire after 3 months for test-retest reliability. We evaluated predictive validity using an electronic dosing monitor as an objective measure of adherence. RESULTS: Focus group participants provided 931 statements related to adherence, of which 88.7% (826/931) could be categorized into the constructs of the Health Belief Model. Perceived barriers accounted for 31% (288/931) of statements, cues-to-action 14% (131/931), susceptibility 12% (116/931), benefits 12% (115/931), severity 10% (91/931), and self-efficacy 9% (85/931). The principal components analysis explained 77% of the variance with five components representing Health Belief Model constructs. Reliability analyses showed acceptable Cronbach's alphas (>.70) for four of the seven components (severity, susceptibility, barriers [eye drop administration], and barriers [discomfort]). Predictive validity was high, with several Health Belief Model questions significantly associated (P <.05) with adherence and a correlation coefficient (R (2)) of .40. Test-retest reliability was 90%. CONCLUSION: The GTCAT shows excellent repeatability, content, construct, and predictive validity for glaucoma adherence. A multisite trial is needed to determine whether the results can be generalized and whether the questionnaire accurately measures the effect of interventions to increase adherence.
PURPOSE: To report the psychometrics of the Glaucoma Treatment Compliance Assessment Tool (GTCAT), a new questionnaire designed to assess adherence with glaucoma therapy. METHODS: We developed the questionnaire according to the constructs of the Health Belief Model. We evaluated the questionnaire using data from a cross-sectional study with focus groups (n = 20) and a prospective observational case series (n=58). Principal components analysis provided assessment of construct validity. We repeated the questionnaire after 3 months for test-retest reliability. We evaluated predictive validity using an electronic dosing monitor as an objective measure of adherence. RESULTS: Focus group participants provided 931 statements related to adherence, of which 88.7% (826/931) could be categorized into the constructs of the Health Belief Model. Perceived barriers accounted for 31% (288/931) of statements, cues-to-action 14% (131/931), susceptibility 12% (116/931), benefits 12% (115/931), severity 10% (91/931), and self-efficacy 9% (85/931). The principal components analysis explained 77% of the variance with five components representing Health Belief Model constructs. Reliability analyses showed acceptable Cronbach's alphas (>.70) for four of the seven components (severity, susceptibility, barriers [eye drop administration], and barriers [discomfort]). Predictive validity was high, with several Health Belief Model questions significantly associated (P <.05) with adherence and a correlation coefficient (R (2)) of .40. Test-retest reliability was 90%. CONCLUSION: The GTCAT shows excellent repeatability, content, construct, and predictive validity for glaucoma adherence. A multisite trial is needed to determine whether the results can be generalized and whether the questionnaire accurately measures the effect of interventions to increase adherence.
Authors: Kelly W Muir; Cecile Santiago-Turla; Sandra S Stinnett; Leon W Herndon; R Rand Allingham; Pratap Challa; Paul P Lee Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: David S Friedman; Henry D Jampel; Nathan G Congdon; Rhonda Miller; Harry A Quigley Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2006-12-22 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Yu Heng Kwan; Si Dun Weng; Dionne Hui Fang Loh; Truls Østbye; Lian Leng Low; Hayden Barry Bosworth; Julian Thumboo; Jie Kie Phang; Livia Jia Yi Oo; Dan V Blalock; Eng Hui Chew; Kai Zhen Yap; Corrinne Yong Koon Tan; Sungwon Yoon; Warren Fong Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-10-09 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Sarah Bentley; Lucy Morgan; Elizabeth Exall; Rob Arbuckle; Rebecca C Rossom; Nicholas Roche; Kamlesh Khunti; Victoria Higgins; James Piercy Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 2.314
Authors: Juno Cho; Leslie M Niziol; Paul P Lee; Michele Heisler; Ken Resnicow; David C Musch; Paula Anne Newman-Casey Journal: Ophthalmol Glaucoma Date: 2021-08-04