A single-item Expectancy Measure's Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness to Detect Changes in Clinical Efficacy...

Expectations may modify outcomes. However, studies often fail to measure expectations. This raises the need for a brief valid and reliable expectancy measure.

To study treatment expectations in individuals entering acupuncture or rest, validity and test re-test reliability of a single-item expectancy measure graded on a category scale, a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and to identify psychometric differences between the scales.

In this methodology study, treatment expectations were measured in 363 participants before they received acupuncture (genuine traditional penetrating or non-penetrating telescopic sham acupuncture, n = 239, 98%, responded) or a control treatment involving just rest (n = 120, 100%, responded), aimed to improve level of relaxation. A treatment expectancy measure, graded on a five-grade category scale, an eight-grade NRS and a 100 mm VAS, was tested for test re-test reliability. Level of expectation and relaxation was measured at baseline, pre- and post-therapy (n = 729 expectancy measurements).

The participants scheduled for acupuncture or rest believed moderately (Inter Quartile Range, IQR, moderately-much) and much (IQR moderately-much) the treatment to be effective. The Intra-Class Correlation coefficient versus Kappa coefficient between test and re-test was .868/.868 for the category scale, .820/.820 for the NRS, and .856/.854 for the VAS. The middle step "Believe moderately the treatment to be effective" was equivalent with median 4 (IQR, 3-4) on NRS and median 52 mm (IQR 42-52) on VAS. The response rates were 708 (97%) on the category scale, 707 (97%) on the NRS, and 703 (96%) on the VAS. All three scales discriminated that pre-therapy expectations were more positive in the individuals who reported an improvement in relaxation level (P < .001-.003). The VAS presented higher responsiveness to detect expectancy changes over time (71% increased expectation), compared to the NRS (52% increased) and the category scale (12% increased), P < .001.

Individuals entering acupuncture, or a control intervention, presented positive treatment expectations, and the expectancy measure presented satisfactory reliability, validity, high response rates, sensitiveness, and responsiveness. Integrative cancer therapy researchers who want to control for expectancy-related bias in clinical trials should consider measuring expectation using the single-item expectancy measure.