medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-2996 (Electronic)
ISSN 0864-0289 (Print)

2022, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Cubana Hematol Inmunol Hemoter 2022; 38 (2)

Therapeutic adherence in hemophilia, linguistic adaptation of the VERITAS-Pro to the Mexican population

Prado RC, Osorio GM

Language: Spanish
References: 40
Page: 1-13
PDF size: 406.17 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Hemophilia is a hemorrhagic disease characterized by the deficiency of either coagulation factor VIII or IX. Nowadays, the gold standard in treatment is the periodic application of the factor (prophylaxis), so it is indispensable to have specialized, standardized and valid instruments to evaluate the degree of adherence to treatment.
Objective: To adapt linguistically and culturally to the Mexican population the Validated Hemophilia Regimen Treatment Adherence Scale-Prophylaxis (VERITAS-Pro).
Methods: The VERITAS-Pro scale was translated into Mexican Spanish, adapted, and re-translated into the original language. The conceptual equivalence of the versions was compared by the original author, subsequently, it was under scrutiny the clarity and relevance of the adapted version by a group of experts in the treatment of people with hemophilia, the degree of agreement between the judges was evaluated with the Aiken statistician.
Results: The original and adapted versions of the test, show an adequate conceptual equivalence, judges were rated adequate clarity (V=0.93, IC10%=0.92-0.95) and relevance (V=0.89, CI10%=0.86-0.91) of the items.
Conclusion: The scale Veritas-Pro, the Mexican Spanish version, is a valid tool to assess the levels of adherence to the prophylaxis in hemophilia.


REFERENCES

  1. Srivastava A, Santagostino E, Dougall A, Kitchen S, Sutherland M, Pipe SW, et al. WFH Guidelines for the Management of Hemophilia, 3rd edition. Haemophilia. 2020:26(Suppl 6):1-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hae.140461.

  2. Osorio-Guzmán M, Gutiérrez-González G, Bazán-Riverón EE, Núñez-Villegas NN, Fernández-Castillo GJ. Percepción de la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud y la depresión en pacientes con hemofilia. Revista Médica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. 2017;54(3):416-22.

  3. Federación Mundial de Hemofilia. Guías para el tratamiento de la hemofilia. Canada: Blackwell Publishing; 2012.

  4. Mansouritorghabeh H. Clinical and laboratory approaches to hemophilia a. Iran J Med Sci. 2015;40(3):194-205.

  5. Kessler CM, Knobl P. Acquired haemophilia: an overview for clinical practice. Eur J Haematol. 2015;95(Suppl 81):36-44.

  6. Bonanad S, García-Dasí M, Aznar JA, Mingot-Castellano ME, Jiménez-Yuste V, Calle M, Palma A, et al. Adherence to prophylaxis in adult patients with severe haemophilia A. Haemophilia; 2020. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.140396.

  7. Greene WB, McMillan CW. Nonsurgical management of hemophilic arthropathy. Instr Course Lect. 1989;38:367-81.

  8. Riley RR, Witkop M, Hellman E, Akins S. Assessment and management of pain in haemophilia patients. Haemophilia. 2011;17(6):839-45. DOI: https://10.1111/j.1365-2516.2011.02567.x8.

  9. Limperg PF, Maurice-Stam H, Heesterbeek MR, Peters M, Coppens M, Kruip MJHA, et al. Illness cognitions associated with health-related quality of life in young adult men with haemophilia. Haemophilia. 2020;26(5):793-9. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.141209.

  10. Liu Y, Chen L, Li K, Shi M, Poon MC. Severe haemophilia A children on low-dose tertiary prophylaxis showed less joint deterioration and better maintenance of functional independence than children on on-demand treatment: A 6-year follow-up study. Haemophilia. 2020;26(5):779-85. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1401610.

  11. Ortega Cerda JJ, Sánchez Herrera D, Rodríguez Miranda OA, Ortega Legaspi JM. Adherencia terapéutica: un problema de atención médica. Acta méd. Grupo Ángeles. 2018 [acceso 25/01/2022];16(3):226-32. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1870-72032018000300226&lng=es11.

  12. Organización Mundial de la Salud. La adherencia al tratamiento médico. México: Organización Mundial de la Salud; 2015.

  13. Haynes, R.B. Introduction. In RB Haynes, Taylor & D.L. Sackett (Eds.), Compliance in health care (pp. 1-10). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1979.

  14. Flórez, L. Psicología Social de la Salud. Bogotá: Manual Moderno; 2007.

  15. Pérez-Simón MR, Cuevas MJ, Ortega L, Carro JA, Mostaza JL, Martín V. Grupo de Trabajo sobre adhesión a TARGA en la provincia de León. Valoración de la adhesión al tratamiento antirretroviral: papel de la determinación de la concentración plasmática de los fármacos no análogos de nucleósidos. Med Clin (Barc). 2003;120(18):701-3.

  16. Vik SA, Maxwell CJ, Hogan DB. Measurement, correlates, and health outcomes of medication adherence among seniors. Ann Pharmacother. 2004;38(2):303-12. DOI: https://10.1345/aph.1D25216.

  17. Nogués Solán X, Sorli Redó ML, Villar García J. Instrumentos de medida de adherencia al tratamiento. An Med Interna. 2007 Mar;24(3):138-41. Spanish. DOI: https://10.4321/s0212-7199200700030000917.

  18. Pérez-Robles T. Evaluación de la adherencia al tratamiento profiláctico en pacientes con hemofilia y su relación con los episodios hemorrágicos. Tesis de Doctorado. Universidad Complutense de Madrid; 2017.

  19. Knobel H, Alonso J, Casado JL, Collazos J, González J, Ruiz I, et al. Validation of a simplified medication adherence questionnaire in a large cohort of HIV-infected patients: the GEEMA Study. AIDS. 2002 Mar 8;16(4):605-13. DOI: https://10.1097/00002030-200203080-0001219.

  20. Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care. 1986;24(1):67-74. DOI: https://10.1097/00005650-198601000-0000720.

  21. Teal S, Brohan E, Hettema Y, Humphrey L, Willgoss T, Hudgens S, et al. Development and psychometric evaluation of a novel tool for assessing patient perception and preference for haemophilia treatment (HaemoPREF). Haemophilia. 2014;20(5):666-73. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1243221.

  22. Tolley C, Staunton H, Brohan E, Spurden D, Cicchetti M, Cappelleri J. Further Validation of the Haemopref in a Real-World Setting. Value in Health. 2016; 19(7):A383-4. DOI: https://10.1016/j.jval.2016.09.21322.

  23. Bonanad S, Schulz M, Gordo A, Spurden D, Cicchetti M, Cappelleri JC, et al. HaemoPREF: Further evaluation of patient perception and preference for treatment in a real world setting. Haemophilia. 2017;23(6):884-93. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1332123.

  24. Duncan N, Kronenberger W, Roberson C, Shapiro A. VERITAS-Pro: a new measure of adherence to prophylactic regimens in haemophilia. Haemophilia. 2010;16(2):247-55. DOI: https://10.1111/j.1365-2516.2009.02129.x24.

  25. Cuesta-Barriuso R, Torres-Ortuño A, Galindo-Piñana P, Nieto-Munuera J, Duncan N, López-Pina JA. Validation of the VERITAS-Pro treatment adherence scale in a Spanish sample population with hemophilia. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;11:653-60 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S12682825.

  26. Bérubé S, Rondeau É,Sultan S. Measuring adherence in pediatric hemophilia patients: French-language adaptation of the VERITAS-Pro and VERITAS-PRN and psychometric properties. Cogent Medicine. 2019; 6:1-12. DOI: https://10.1080/2331205X.2019.167365926.

  27. Ferreira AA, Leite ICG, Duncan NA. Validation of the Brazilian version of the VERITAS-Pro scale to assess adherence to prophylactic regimens in hemophilia. Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter. 2018;40(1):18-24. DOI: https://10.1016/j.bjhh.2017.09.00227.

  28. Lock J, Raat H, Duncan N, Shapiro A, Beijlevelt M, Peters M, et al. Adherence to treatment in a Western European paediatric population with haemophilia: reliability and validity of the VERITAS-Pro scale. Haemophilia. 2014; 20(5):616-23. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1246328.

  29. Miesbach W, Kalnins W. Adherence to prophylactic treatment in patients with haemophilia in Germany. Haemophilia. 2016 Sep;22(5):e367-74. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1300329.

  30. Geisinger KF. Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychol Assess. 1994; 6(4):304. DOI: https://10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.30430.

  31. Balluerka N, Gorostiaga A, Alonso I, Haramburu M. La adaptación de instrumentos de medida de unas culturas a otras: una perspectiva práctica. Psicothema. 2007;19(1),124-33.

  32. Muñiz J, Elosua P. Hambleton RK. Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: segunda edición. Psicothema. 2013;25(2),151-7.

  33. Spector PE, Liu C, Sanchez JI. Methodological and Substantive Issues in Conducting Multinational and Cross-Cultural Research. Ann Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behavior. 2015;101-31.

  34. Brislin RW. The wording and translation of research instruments. In Lonner WJ, Berry JW ed. Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage;1986. p.137-64.

  35. von Mackensen S, Campos IG, Acquadro C, Strandberg-Larsen M. Cross-cultural adaptation and linguistic validation of age-group-specific haemophilia patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for patients and parents. Haemophilia. 2013;19(2):e73-83. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1205435.

  36. Lambert C, Meité N, Sanogo I, Lobet S, von Mackensen S, Hermans C. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Haem-A-QoL in Côte d'Ivoire. Haemophilia. 2020;26(3):459-66. DOI: https://10.1111/hae.1398736.

  37. Varny JW. Linguistic validation process. PedsQL Traslations. 2020. (acceso 16/02/21). Disponible en: https://www.pedsql.org/translations.html37.

  38. Aiken LR. Content validity and reliability of single items or questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1980;40(4):955-9. DOI: https://10.1177/00131644800400041938.

  39. Penfield RD, Giacobbi PR. Applying a Score Confidence Interval to Aiken's Item Content-Relevance Index. Measurement Phys Educ Exercise Sci. 2004;8(4):213-25. DOI: https://10.1207/s15327841mpee0804_339.

  40. Indiana Hemophilia & Thrombosis Center. Care Team. 2022 (acceso 16/02/2021). Disponible en: https://www.ihtc.org/care-team40.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com