Rett syndrome is a rare neurodevelopmental disorder primarily affecting females. This syndrome is associated with many comorbidities and impairments related to motor function, breathing, sleep, expressive language, and repetitive hand movements. The Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ) is one measure used to assess changes in Rett syndrome–related manifestations or core symptoms. Little is known about how caregivers think about meaningful changes in the items that make up the RSBQ scale.
Methods
This qualitative study explored how caregivers of individuals with Rett syndrome viewed changes in the symptoms covered in the RSBQ. We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 caregivers and employed thematic analysis, identifying themes using an iterative process.
Results
Two factors characterized caregivers’ thoughts about meaningful changes in Rett syndrome manifestations. First, general features of these symptoms rendered them bothersome: the extent of bother compared to other symptoms, if or how they prevented desirable behaviors and their temporal qualities. Second, caregivers evaluated the meaning of improvements by considering the decrease in bother and the potential benefits of change. Improvements had social and psychological consequences for individuals with Rett syndrome and caregivers. In addition, implications for health, fine and gross motor skills, and communication were also substantial.
NeulJLKaufmannWEGlazeDG, et al.Rett syndrome: revised diagnostic criteria and nomenclature. Ann Neurol.2010;68(6):944-950. doi:10.1002/ana.22124
2.
AmirREVan Den VeyverIBWanMTranCQFranckeUZoghbiHY. Rett syndrome is caused by mutations in X-linked MECP2, encoding methyl- CpG-binding protein 2. Nat Genet.1999;23(2):185-188. doi:10.1038/13810
3.
TillotsonRBirdA. The molecular basis of MeCP2 function in the brain. J Mol Biol.2020;432(6):1602-1623. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2019.10.004
4.
HagbergB. Rett’s syndrome: prevalence and impact on progressive severe mental retardation in girls. Acta Pædiatrica. 1985;74(3):405-408. doi:10.1111/j.1651-2227.1985.tb10993.x.
5.
LaurvickCLde KlerkNBowerC, et al.Rett syndrome in Australia: a review of the epidemiology. J Pediatr.2006;148(3):347-352. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2005.10.037
6.
NeulJLBenkeTAMarshED, et al.The array of clinical phenotypes of males with mutations in methyl-CpG binding protein 2. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2019;180(1):55-67. doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.32707
7.
AndersonAWongKJacobyPDownsJLeonardH. Twenty years of surveillance in Rett syndrome: what does this tell US?Orphanet J Rare Dis.2014;9(1):1-9. doi:10.1186/1750-1172-9-87
8.
PercyAKNeulJLGlazeDG, et al.Rett syndrome diagnostic criteria: lessons from the natural history study. Ann Neurol.2010;68(6):951-955. doi:10.1002/ana.22154.Rett
9.
FuCArmstrongDMarshE, et al.Multisystem comorbidities in classic Rett syndrome: a scoping review. BMJ Paediatrics Open. 2020;4(1):1-6. doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2020-000731.
10.
CianfaglioneRClarkeAKerrM, et al.A national survey of Rett syndrome: behavioural characteristics. J Neurodev Disord.2015;7(1):1-9. doi:10.1186/s11689-015-9104-y
11.
KaufmannWEStallworthJLEvermanDBSkinnerSA. Neurobiologically-based treatments in Rett syndrome: opportunities and challenges. Expert Opin Orphan Drugs. 2016;4(10):1043-1055. doi:10.1080/21678707.2016.1229181.
12.
BuchananCBStallworthJLScottAE, et al.Behavioral profiles in Rett syndrome: data from the natural history study. Brain and Development. 2019;41(2):123-134. doi:10.1016/j.braindev.2018.08.008
13.
KyleSMVashiNJusticeMJ. Rett syndrome: a neurological disorder with metabolic components. Open Biol.2018;8. doi:10.1098/rsob.170216
14.
MundeVVlaskampCter HaarA. Social-emotional instability in individuals with Rett syndrome: parents’ experiences with second stage behaviour. J Intellect Disabil Res.2016;60(1):43-53. doi:10.1111/jir.12233
15.
LimJGreenspoonDHuntAMcAdamL. Rehabilitation interventions in Rett syndrome: a scoping review. Dev Med Child Neurol.2020;62(8):906-916. doi:10.1111/dmcn.14565
16.
GlazeDGNeulJLKaufmannWE, et al.Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of trofinetide in pediatric Rett syndrome. Neurology. 2019;92:E1912-E1925. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000007316
17.
MountRHCharmanTHastingsRPReillySCassH. The Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ): Refining the behavioural phenotype of Rett syndrome. J Child Psychol Psychiatry.2002;43(8):1099-1110. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00236
18.
HouWBhattacharyaUPradanaWATarquinioDC. Assessment of a clinical trial metric for Rett syndrome: critical analysis of the Rett Syndrome Behavioural Questionnaire. Pediatr Neurol.2020;107:48-56. doi:10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2020.01.009
19.
ObermanLMDownsJCianfaglioneRLeonardHKaufmannWE. Assessment of a Clinical Trial Metric for Rett Syndrome: critical Analysis of the Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire. Pediatr Neurol.2020;111:4. doi:10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2020.04.020
20.
ByromBBreedonPTulkki-WilkeRPlatkoJ. Meaningful change: defining the interpretability of changes in endpoints derived from interactive and mHealth technologies in healthcare and clinical research. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng.2020;7:1-8. doi:10.1177/2055668319892778
21.
RevickiDHaysRDCellaDSloanJ. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol.2008;61(2):102-109. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012
22.
US Food and Drug Administration. Patient-Focused Drug Development: Methods to Identify What Is Important to Patients Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff, and Other Stakeholders. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/patient-focused-drug-development-methods-identify-what-important-patients. 2022.
23.
McGlothlinAELewisRJ. Minimal clinically important difference: defining what really matters to patients. J Am Med Assoc.2014;312(13):1342-1343. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.13128.
24.
StauntonHWillgossTNelsenL, et al.An overview of using qualitative techniques to explore and define estimates of clinically important change on clinical outcome assessments. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2019;3(1):16. doi:10.1186/s41687-019-0100-y
25.
SosnowskiRKulpaMZiȩtalewiczU, et al.Basic issues concerning health-related quality of life. Cent European J Urol. 2017;70:206-211. doi:10.5173/ceju.2017.923
26.
EpsteinALeonardHDavisE, et al.Conceptualizing a quality of life framework for girls with Rett syndrome using qualitative methods. Am J Med Genet A. 2016;170(3):645-653. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.37500
27.
CorchónSCarrillo-LópezICauliO. Quality of life related to clinical features in patients with Rett syndrome and their parents: a systematic review. Metab Brain Dis. 2018;33(6):1801-1810. doi:10.1007/s11011-018-0316-1
28.
LaneJBLeeHSSmithLW, et al.Clinical severity and quality of life in children and adolescents with Rett syndrome. Neurology. 2011;77(20):1812-1818.
29.
KillianJTLaneJBLeeHS, et al.Caretaker quality of life in Rett syndrome: disorder features and psychological predictors. Pediatr Neurol. 2016;58:67-74. doi:10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2015.12.021
30.
LaurvickCLMsallMESilburnSBowerCde KlerkNLeonardH. Physical and mental health of mothers caring for a child with Rett syndrome. Pediatrics. 2006;118(4):e1152-e1164. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0439.
31.
SandelowskiM. Rigor or rigor mortis: the problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited. Adv Nurs Sci. 1993;16(2):1-8.
32.
NealeJ. Iterative categorization (IC): a systematic technique for analysing qualitative data. Addiction. 2016;111(6):1096-1106. doi:10.1111/add.13314
33.
BraunVClarkeV. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol.2006;3:77-101. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-35913-1
34.
PalinkasLAHorwitzSMGreenCAWisdomJPDuanNHoagwoodK. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Admin Policy Ment Health. 2015;42(5):533-544. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.Purposeful
35.
TongASainsburyPCraigJ. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care.2007;19(6):349-357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
36.
HillCEThompsonBJHessSAKnoxSWilliamsENLadanyN. Consensual qualitative research: an update. J Couns Psychol.2005;52(2):196-205. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196
37.
HenninkMMKaiserBNMarconiVC. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: how many interviews are enough?Qual Health Res.2017;27(4):591-608. doi:10.1177/1049732316665344
38.
LaschKEMarquisPVigneuxM, et al.PRO Development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation. Qual Life Res.2010;19(8):1087-1096. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9677-6
39.
LaDonnaKAArtinoARBalmerDF. Beyond the guise of saturation: rigor and qualitative interview data. J Grad Med Educ.2021;13(5):607-611. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-21-00752.1
40.
NowellLSNorrisJMWhiteDEMoulesNJ. Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual Methods.2017;16(1):1-13. doi:10.1177/1609406917733847
41.
DoshiDYouakimJMVentolaP. Mapping the top concerns of caregivers of individuals with Rett Syndrome with items on the Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire to identify clinically meaningful outcomes. Paper presented at: National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD) Rare Diseases and Orphan Products Breakthrough Summit; Washington, DC, October 16-18, 2022.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
