Browsing by Author "Miller, Jennifer L."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Development and initial testing of the self‐care of chronic illness inventory
    (Wiley, 2018-10) Riegel, Barbara; Barbaranelli, Claudio; Sethares, Kristen A.; Daus, Marguerite; Moser, Debra K.; Miller, Jennifer L.; Haedtke, Christine A.; Feinberg, Jodi L.; Lee, Solim; Stromberg, Anna; Jaarsma, Tiny; School of Nursing
    Aim The aim was to develop and psychometrically test the self‐care of chronic illness Inventory, a generic measure of self‐care. Background Existing measures of self‐care are disease‐specific or behaviour‐specific; no generic measure of self‐care exists. Design Cross‐sectional survey. Methods We developed a 20‐item self‐report instrument based on the Middle Range Theory of Self‐Care of Chronic Illness, with three separate scales measuring Self‐Care Maintenance, Self‐Care Monitoring, and Self‐Care Management. Each of the three scales is scored separately and standardized 0–100 with higher scores indicating better self‐care. After demonstrating content validity, psychometric testing was conducted in a convenience sample of 407 adults (enrolled from inpatient and outpatient settings at five sites in the United States and ResearchMatch.org). Dimensionality testing with confirmatory factor analysis preceded reliability testing. Results The Self‐Care Maintenance scale (eight items, two dimensions: illness‐related and health‐promoting behaviour) fit well when tested with a two‐factor confirmatory model. The Self‐Care Monitoring scale (five items, single factor) fitted well. The Self‐Care Management scale (seven items, two factors: autonomous and consulting behaviour), when tested with a two‐factor confirmatory model, fitted adequately. A simultaneous confirmatory factor analysis on the combined set of items supported the more general model. Conclusion The self‐care of chronic illness inventory is adequate in reliability and validity. We suggest further testing in diverse populations of patients with chronic illnesses.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Diazoxide Choline Extended-Release Tablet in People With Prader-Willi Syndrome: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial
    (Oxford University Press, 2023) Miller, Jennifer L.; Gevers, Evelien; Bridges, Nicola; Yanovski, Jack A.; Salehi, Parisa; Obrynba, Kathryn S.; Felner, Eric I.; Bird, Lynne M.; Shoemaker, Ashley H.; Angulo, Moris; Butler, Merlin G.; Stevenson, David; Abuzzahab, Jennifer; Barrett, Timothy; Lah, Melissa; Littlejohn, Elizabeth; Mathew, Verghese; Cowen, Neil M.; Bhatnagar, Anish; DESTINY PWS Investigators; Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine
    Context: Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) is a rare neurobehavioral-metabolic disease caused by the lack of paternally expressed genes in the chromosome 15q11-q13 region, characterized by hypotonia, neurocognitive problems, behavioral difficulties, endocrinopathies, and hyperphagia resulting in severe obesity if not controlled. Objective: The primary end point was change from baseline in hyperphagia using the Hyperphagia Questionnaire for Clinical Trials (HQ-CT). Other end points included Global Impression Scores, and changes in body composition, behaviors, and hormones. Methods: In DESTINY PWS, a 13-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, 127 participants with PWS aged 4 years and older with hyperphagia were randomly assigned 2:1 to diazoxide choline extended-release tablet (DCCR) or placebo. Results: DCCR did not significantly improve hyperphagia (HQ-CT least-square mean (LSmean) [SE] -5.94 [0.879] vs -4.27 [1.145]; P = .198), but did so in participants with severe hyperphagia (LSmean [SE] -9.67 [1.429] vs -4.26 [1.896]; P = .012). Two of 3 secondary end points were improved (Clinical Global Impression of Improvement [CGI-I]; P = .029; fat mass; P = .023). In an analysis of results generated pre-COVID, the primary (HQ-CT; P = .037) and secondary end points were all improved (CGI-I; P = .015; Caregiver Global Impression of Change; P = .031; fat mass; P = .003). In general, DCCR was well tolerated with 83.3% in the DCCR group experiencing a treatment-emergent adverse event and 73.8% in the placebo group (not significant). Conclusion: DCCR did not significantly improve hyperphagia in the primary analysis but did in participants with severe baseline hyperphagia and in the pre-COVID analysis. DCCR treatment was associated with significant improvements in body composition and clinician-reported outcomes.