Affect and cognition measures in preference-based decisions: Validity testing of the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale and a decision-specific anxiety measure with men eligible for prostate cancer screening

Background. At present, prostate cancer screening (PCS) guidelines require a discussion of risks, benefits, alternatives, and personal values, making decision aids an important tool to help convey information and to help clarify values. Objective: The overall goal of this study is to provide evidence of the reliability and validity of a PCS anxiety measure and the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Methods. Using data from a randomized, controlled PCS decision aid trial that measured PCS anxiety at baseline and DCS at baseline (T0) and at two-weeks (T2), four psychometric properties were assessed: (1) internal consistency reliability, indicated by factor analysis intraclass correlations and Cronbach's α; (2) construct validity, indicated by patterns of Pearson correlations among subscales; (3) discriminant validity, indicated by the measure's ability to discriminate between undecided men and those with a definite screening intention; and (4) factor validity and invariance using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). Results. The PCS anxiety measure had adequate internal consistency reliability and good construct and discriminant validity. CFAs indicated that the 3-factor model did not have adequate fit. CFAs for a general PCS anxiety measure and a PSA anxiety measure indicated adequate fit. The general PCS anxiety measure was invariant across clinics. The DCS had adequate internal consistency reliability except for the support subscale and had adequate discriminate validity. Good construct validity was found at the private clinic, but was only found for the feeling informed subscale at the public clinic. The traditional DCS did not have adequate fit at T0 or at T2. The alternative DCS had adequate fit at T0 but was not identified at T2. Factor loadings indicated that two subscales, feeling informed and feeling clear about values, were not distinct factors. Conclusions. Our general PCS anxiety measure can be used in PCS decision aid studies. The alternative DCS may be appropriate for men eligible for PCS. Implications: More emphasis needs to be placed on the development of PCS anxiety items relating to testing procedures. We recommend that the two DCS versions be validated in other samples of men eligible for PCS and in other health care decisions that involve uncertainty. ^

An evaluation of the personal response system program for the elderly in Harris County, Texas

The Personal Response System Program at Huffington Center on Aging, Baylor College of Medicine, provides emergency call systems for elderly people living independently in Houston, Texas. The goal of the project was to complete a formative evaluation of the Personal Response System Program. The specific aims of the evaluation were three-fold. One aim was to evaluate participant health status and level of disability. The second aim was to develop a health care cost estimation strategy. Finally, a preliminary cost-effectiveness analysis was completed to evaluate the program's impact on health care costs and health status among the elderly target population. ^ The evaluation was a longitudinal, randomized experimental design. After the screening of 120 volunteers for eligibility, clients were asked to complete a written questionnaire and a monthly health service contact diary. Volunteers were contacted by telephone interviewers to collect health status information from 100 eligible clients (83%) on three occasions during the six months of follow-up. ^ Initially, volunteers were randomized to two experimental groups. The two groups were found to be comparable at the beginning of the study. No significant differences were detected related to health status, level of disability, or history of physician visits at baseline. However, the group with the Personal Response System (PRS) device had more adverse health events, higher IADL scores, more frequent use of walkers, lower average health status scores, and fewer community volunteers hours than the usual care comparison group. ^ The health care costs were estimated based on an algorithm adapted from the American Medical Association guidelines. Average total health care costs for the group with the PRS device ($912) were greater than the usual care group ($464). However, median health care values for the PRS group ($263) were similar to the usual care comparison group ($234). The preliminary findings indicated that the use of the PRS device was not associated with health care cost savings. ^ In the preliminary cost-effectiveness analysis, use of the personal response system was found to be associated with increased mental health status among elderly clients. The cost-effectiveness evaluation indicated that the associated cost for six months was $710 per unit increase in mental component score when the $150 PRS subscription was included. However, clients with the PRS device were found to have a greater decline in physical health status during the six-month follow-up. The beneficial effect on mental health status was found to be in contrast to negative findings associated with changes in physical health status. The implications for future research relate to the need to identify risk factors among geriatric populations to better target groups that would most likely benefit from PRS Program enrollment. ^