BACKGROUND: Recent research has shown that distinct dimensions in the perception of dyspnea can be differentiated; however, most studies to date have only used a global rating scale for the measurement of this sensation. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the different influence of sensory and affective aspects of perceived dyspnea on the commonly used Borg scale, which measures the global perception of dyspnea. METHODS: Dyspnea was induced in 16 healthy volunteers (mean age 26.2 +/- 6.3 years) by breathing through an inspiratory resistive load (3.57 kPa/l/s) in two experimental conditions (attention and distraction). After each of the two conditions the experienced intensity (i.e., sensory dimension) and unpleasantness (i.e., affective dimension) of dyspnea were rated on separate visual analog scales (VAS), followed by a global rating of dyspnea on the Borg scale. Hierarchical multiple linear regression models were calculated to analyze the predictive validity of VAS ratings of intensity and unpleasantness on the Borg scale ratings. RESULTS: When subjects attended to their breathing, only VAS intensity scores showed a significant influence on Borg scale ratings (p < 0.05). In contrast, only the VAS unpleasantness scores showed a significant influence on Borg scale ratings (p < 0.05) when subjects were distracted. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that sensory and affective aspects of perceived dyspnea differentially influence the global measure of dyspnea as determined by the Borg scale. A differentiation between these aspects in future studies through the use of separate rating scales could yield more detailed information on the perception and report of dyspnea.
BACKGROUND: Recent research has shown that distinct dimensions in the perception of dyspnea can be differentiated; however, most studies to date have only used a global rating scale for the measurement of this sensation. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the different influence of sensory and affective aspects of perceived dyspnea on the commonly used Borg scale, which measures the global perception of dyspnea. METHODS:Dyspnea was induced in 16 healthy volunteers (mean age 26.2 +/- 6.3 years) by breathing through an inspiratory resistive load (3.57 kPa/l/s) in two experimental conditions (attention and distraction). After each of the two conditions the experienced intensity (i.e., sensory dimension) and unpleasantness (i.e., affective dimension) of dyspnea were rated on separate visual analog scales (VAS), followed by a global rating of dyspnea on the Borg scale. Hierarchical multiple linear regression models were calculated to analyze the predictive validity of VAS ratings of intensity and unpleasantness on the Borg scale ratings. RESULTS: When subjects attended to their breathing, only VAS intensity scores showed a significant influence on Borg scale ratings (p < 0.05). In contrast, only the VAS unpleasantness scores showed a significant influence on Borg scale ratings (p < 0.05) when subjects were distracted. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that sensory and affective aspects of perceived dyspnea differentially influence the global measure of dyspnea as determined by the Borg scale. A differentiation between these aspects in future studies through the use of separate rating scales could yield more detailed information on the perception and report of dyspnea.
Authors: Janelle Yorke; Anne-Marie Russell; Jeff Swigris; Caroline Shuldham; Carol Haigh; Nikki Rochnia; Jennifer Hoyle; Paul W Jones Journal: J Asthma Date: 2011-06-02 Impact factor: 2.515
Authors: Nicholas D Giardino; Jeffrey L Curtis; Adin-Cristian Andrei; Vincent S Fan; Joshua O Benditt; Mark Lyubkin; Keith Naunheim; Gerard Criner; Barry Make; Robert A Wise; Susan K Murray; Alfred P Fishman; Frank C Sciurba; Israel Liberzon; Fernando J Martinez Journal: Respir Res Date: 2010-03-09
Authors: Anna Norweg; Pengsheng Ni; Eric Garshick; George O'Connor; Kira Wilke; Alan M Jette Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: David C Currow; Stephen Quinn; Aine Greene; Janet Bull; Miriam J Johnson; Amy P Abernethy Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2013-06-08 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Virginia Carrieri-Kohlman; DorAnne Donesky-Cuenco; Soo Kyung Park; Lynda Mackin; Huong Q Nguyen; Steven M Paul Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 2.228