Response process and test-retest reliability of the Context Assessment for Community Health tool in Vietnam

BACKGROUND: The recently developed Context Assessment for Community Health (COACH) tool aims to measure aspects of the local healthcare context perceived to influence knowledge translation in low- and middle-income countries. The tool measures eight dimensions (organizational resources, community engagement, monitoring services for action, sources of knowledge, commitment to work, work culture, leadership, and informal payment) through 49 items. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to explore the understanding and stability of the COACH tool among health providers in Vietnam. DESIGNS: To investigate the response process, think-aloud interviews were undertaken with five community health workers, six nurses and midwives, and five physicians. Identified problems were classified according to Conrad and Blair's taxonomy and grouped according to an estimation of the magnitude of the problem's effect on the response data. Further, the stability of the tool was examined using a test-retest survey among 77 respondents. The reliability was analyzed for items (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and percent agreement) and dimensions (ICC and Bland-Altman plots). RESULTS: In general, the think-aloud interviews revealed that the COACH tool was perceived as clear, well organized, and easy to answer. Most items were understood as intended. However, seven prominent problems in the items were identified and the content of three dimensions was perceived to be of a sensitive nature. In the test-retest survey, two-thirds of the items and seven of eight dimensions were found to have an ICC agreement ranging from moderate to substantial (0.5-0.7), demonstrating that the instrument has an acceptable level of stability. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the Vietnamese translation of the COACH tool is generally perceived to be clear and easy to understand and has acceptable stability. There is, however, a need to rephrase and add generic examples to clarify some items and to further review items with low ICC.

12-month results from a novel test battery used in a duodenal levodopa infusion trial

A novel test battery consisting of self-assessments and motor tests (tapping and spiral drawing) for patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) was developed for a hand computer with touch screen in a telemedicine setting. Tests are performed four times per day in the home environment during weeklong test periods. Results are processed into scores for different dimensions of the symptom state and an ‘overall score’ reflecting the global condition of a patient during a test period. The test battery was validated in a separate study recently submitted to Mov Disord. This test battery is currently being used in an open longitudinal trial (DAPHNE, EudraCT No. 2005- 002654-21) by sixty-five patients with advanced PD at nine clinics around Sweden. On inclusion, the patients were either receiving treatment with duodenal levodopa/carbidopa infusion (Duodopa®) (n=36), or they were candidates for receiving this treatment (n=29). We now present interim results for the first twelve months. Test periods were performed in three-month intervals. During most of the periods, UPDRS ratings were performed in afternoons at the start of the week. In twenty of the patients, scores were available during individually optimized oral polypharamacy, before receiving infusion and at least one test period after having started infusion treatment. Usability and compliance with performing tests, this far are good, both with patients and clinical staff. Correlations between test periods 2 and 3 during infusion treatment (three months apart) are stronger for overall test score than for total UPDRS, indicating good reliability. The correlation between overall test score and UPDRS for all test periods is adequate (r=-0.6). In an exact Wilcoxon signed rank test, where the endpoint is the change from the first to the twelve month test period (n=25), there was no change in test results in any of the test battery dimensions for the patients already receiving infusion when included. However, in the patients entering the study before receiving infusion, there was a significant change (improvement) from the baseline to the twelve month test period in dimensions; ‘off’, ‘dyskinesia’ and ‘satisfied’ and in the ‘overall score’ (n=15). The mean improvement in overall score after infusion was 29% (p=0.015). We conclude that the test battery is able to measure a functional improvement with infusion that is sustained over at least twelve months.