Development and early validation of a patient-reported outcome measure to assess sleep amongst people experiencing problems with alcohol or other drugs

Abstract

Study ObjectivesTo develop a patient-reported outcome measure to assess sleep amongst people experiencing problems with alcohol or other drugs.MethodsItem development included secondary analyses of qualitative interviews with drug or alcohol users in residential treatment, a review of validated sleep measures, focus groups with drug or alcohol users in residential treatment, and feedback from drug or alcohol users recruited from community and residential settings. An initial version of the measure was completed by 549 current and former drug or alcohol users (442 in person and 107 online). Analyses comprised classical test theory methods, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, measurement invariance assessment, and item response theory (IRT).ResultsThe initial measure (30 items) had good content and face validity and was named the Substance Use Sleep Scale (SUSS) by addiction service users. After seven items were removed due to low item-factor loadings, two factors were retained and labeled: “Mind and Body Sleep Problems” (14 items) and “Substance-Related Sleep Problems” (nine items). Measurement invariance was confirmed with respect to gender, age, and administration format. IRT (information) and classical test theory (internal consistency and stability) indicated measure reliability. Standard parametric and nonparametric techniques supported convergent and discriminant validity.ConclusionsSUSS is an easy-to-complete patient–reported outcome measure of sleep for people with drug or alcohol problems. It can be used by those concerned about their own sleep, and by treatment providers and researchers seeking to better understand, assess, and potentially treat sleep difficulties amongst this population. Further validity testing with larger and more diverse samples is now required.

Polysomnographic Correlates for the Risk of Relapse in Detoxified Opiate-Misuse Patients

“…28 Moreover, the presence of insomnia and daytime sleepiness even in the absence of drug-misuse poses a high risk for relapse after detoxification. [28][29][30][31] Our results are in agreement with…”

South African service users’ perceptions of patient‐reported outcome and experience measures for adolescent substance use treatment: A qualitative study

“…PROMs and PREMs for adult service users of SUD treatment are available and are useful for assessing whether they view their recent SUD treatment episode as effective and satisfactory [11,[24][25][26][27][28][29]. Despite growing international interest in the development and implementation of patient-reported measures within the context of SUD treatment and related services [24][25][26][27][28][29], these measures have been developed with adult populations and the extent to which they require adaptation to ensure relevance and appropriateness for adolescent service users is not yet known. To address this gap, we explored the SUD treatment outcomes and experiences that South African adolescent service users think should be assessed and their views on how these measures should be administered.…”

“…Adolescent service users identified several additional issues, not currently captured by adult PROMs (e.g. ), that they considered critical for the attainment of their SUD treatment goals and thought should be incorporated into an adolescent version of the SAATSA. Principal among these were questions on whether treatment had: (i) enhanced their motivation for changing substance use behaviour; (ii) taught them strategies for coping with stressors and regulating negative emotions which often led to substance use; (iii) helped them engage with recreational alternatives to drug use in order to alleviate some of the common environmental barriers to maintaining SUD treatment gains (such as boredom and negative peer influences); and (iv) helped them identify and build social networks to support sustained behaviour change.…”

Patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures in interstitial lung disease: where to go from here?

“…Other explanations for the low sensitivity of PROMs in ILD/IPF trials could be related to the confounding effect of differences in language, practices and expectations between people from different countries and cultures [97]. The importance of linguistic validation has increasingly been acknowledged with PROMs intended for use in a heterogeneous population (see also later).…”