J E A Williams1, S J Singh, L Sewell, M D L Morgan. 1. Institute for Lung Health, Department of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK. johanna.williams@uhl-tr.nhs.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A self-reported CRQ (CRQ-SR) has recently been developed and found to be a reproducible and reliable measure of health status. This study explores both the sensitivity of the CRQ-SR and relative sensitivity compared with the conventional interviewer led CRQ (CRQ-IL) in patients undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: Eighty patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who had been referred for pulmonary rehabilitation completed the CRQ-SR at initial assessment and at the end of the 7 week programme. A further 35 patients completed both the CRQ-SR and the CRQ-IL, administered 1 week apart, before starting rehabilitation and again at the end of the programme. RESULTS: There were large statistically and clinically significant changes in mean score per dimension following rehabilitation in all dimensions of the CRQ-SR (dyspnoea mean difference 0.87 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.14); fatigue 0.76 (0.53 to 1.0); emotion 0.60 (0.35 to 0.86); mastery 0.76 (0.52 to 1.0); p<0.001). Similar results were found in the comparison of the sensitivity of the CRQ-SR and the CRQ-IL, with large changes in mean score per dimension following rehabilitation for both versions of the questionnaire (p<0.005). No significant differences were seen in the magnitude of change between the two formats of the questionnaire (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The self-reported CRQ is as sensitive to change as the interviewer led CRQ in patients undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation but has the advantage of being less time consuming to administer.
BACKGROUND: A self-reported CRQ (CRQ-SR) has recently been developed and found to be a reproducible and reliable measure of health status. This study explores both the sensitivity of the CRQ-SR and relative sensitivity compared with the conventional interviewer led CRQ (CRQ-IL) in patients undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: Eighty patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who had been referred for pulmonary rehabilitation completed the CRQ-SR at initial assessment and at the end of the 7 week programme. A further 35 patients completed both the CRQ-SR and the CRQ-IL, administered 1 week apart, before starting rehabilitation and again at the end of the programme. RESULTS: There were large statistically and clinically significant changes in mean score per dimension following rehabilitation in all dimensions of the CRQ-SR (dyspnoea mean difference 0.87 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.14); fatigue 0.76 (0.53 to 1.0); emotion 0.60 (0.35 to 0.86); mastery 0.76 (0.52 to 1.0); p<0.001). Similar results were found in the comparison of the sensitivity of the CRQ-SR and the CRQ-IL, with large changes in mean score per dimension following rehabilitation for both versions of the questionnaire (p<0.005). No significant differences were seen in the magnitude of change between the two formats of the questionnaire (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The self-reported CRQ is as sensitive to change as the interviewer led CRQ in patients undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation but has the advantage of being less time consuming to administer.
Authors: T L Griffiths; M L Burr; I A Campbell; V Lewis-Jenkins; J Mullins; K Shiels; P J Turner-Lawlor; N Payne; R G Newcombe; A A Ionescu; J Thomas; J Tunbridge; A A Lonescu Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-01-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: D J Cook; G H Guyatt; E Juniper; L Griffith; W McIlroy; A Willan; R Jaeschke; R Epstein Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 1993-06 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Karin M M Lemmens; Anna P Nieboer; Maureen P M H Rutten-Van Mölken; Constant P van Schayck; Javier D Asin; Jos A M Dirven; Robbert Huijsman Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Annemarie L Lee; Nola Cecins; Catherine J Hill; Anne E Holland; Linda Rautela; Robert G Stirling; Phillip J Thompson; Christine F McDonald; Sue Jenkins Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2010-02-02 Impact factor: 3.317
Authors: Andrew M Busch; Lori A J Scott-Sheldon; Jacqueline Pierce; Elizabeth A Chattillion; Karlene Cunningham; Maria L Buckley; Jeffrey M Mazer; Cerissa L Blaney; Michael P Carey Journal: Respir Med Date: 2014-04-26 Impact factor: 3.415