Psychometric validation of the Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis treated with budesonide oral suspension

Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Table 4 Stage 2: Psychometric evaluation of the DSQ (version 4.0) to assess the construct validity, concurrent validity, reliability and responsiveness of the DSQ in patients with EoE at baseline (visit 2)

Parameter	All patients (n = 93)
Construct validity – known-groups method
EoE Symptom Survey, ^amean DSQ score
Heartburn (− vs +)	26.6 vs 34.3 (p = 0.0140)
Chest pain (− vs +)	27.6 vs 34.1 (p = 0.0448)
Regurgitation (− vs +)	26.7 vs 34.9 (p = 0.0092)
Abdominal pain (− vs +)	28.7 vs 31.8 (p = 0.3476)
Nausea (− vs +)	27.7 vs 34.9 (p = 0.0325)
Vomiting (− vs +)	26.9 vs 49.2 (p < 0.0001)
Concurrent validity – PGA of disease activity, ^bmean DSQ score	21.1 vs 29.5 vs 33.7 (p = 0.0709)
Test−retest reliability ^c	ICC = 0.82
Responsiveness, ^dmean DSQ score
Responder (≤6 eos/hpf)	−16.2 (14.3) [−1.09], p < 0.0001
Non-responder (>6 eos/hpf)	−9.9 (11.6) [−0.67], p < 0.0001

ANOVA analysis of variance, DSQ Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire, EoE eosinophilic esophagitis, eos eosinophils, hpf high-power field, ICC intra-class correlation coefficient, PGA Physician Global Assessment, SES standardized effect size
^aComparison of mean DSQ scores for patients with (+) or without (−) symptom (p value, paired t-test): heartburn, − (n = 54) + (n = 38); chest pain, − (n = 61) + (n = 31); regurgitation, − (n = 57) + (n = 35); abdominal pain, − (n = 61) + (n = 31); nausea, − (n = 65) + (n = 27); vomiting, − (n = 80) + (n = 12)
^bComparison of mean DSQ scores for patients with none to mild (n = 10), moderate (n = 56) or worst possible disease (n = 26) (p value, one-way ANOVA)
^cTest–retest reliability, n = 93
^dResponsiveness defined as mean change in DSQ score from baseline (visit 2), mean change (SD) [SES], p value (responders [≤6 eos/hpf], n = 20; non-responders [>6 eos/hpf], n = 67)