Duc M Ha1,2,3, Lubin R Deng4, Allison V Lange5, Jeffrey J Swigris6, David B Bekelman7,4,8. 1. Medical Service, Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 1700 N Wheeling Street, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. duc.ha@va.gov. 2. Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA. duc.ha@va.gov. 3. Division of Pulmonary Sciences and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA. duc.ha@va.gov. 4. Denver-Seattle Center of Innovation, Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, CO, USA. 5. Division of Pulmonary Sciences and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA. 6. Interstitial Lung Disease Program, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, USA. 7. Medical Service, Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 1700 N Wheeling Street, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. 8. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is a common and debilitating symptom that affects many different patient populations. Dyspnea measures should assess multiple domains. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of an ultra-brief, multi-dimensional dyspnea measure. DESIGN: We adapted the DEG from the PEG, a valid 3-item pain measure, to assess average dyspnea intensity (D), interference with enjoyment of life (E), and dyspnea burden with general activity (G). PARTICIPANTS: We used data from a multi-site randomized clinical trial among outpatients with heart failure. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated reliability (Cronbach's alpha), concurrent validity with the Memorial-Symptom-Assessment-Scale (MSAS) shortness-of-breath distress-orbothersome item and 7-item Generalized-Anxiety-Disorder (GAD-7) scale, knowngroups validity with New-York-Heart-Association-Functional-Classification (NYHA) 1-2 or 3-4 and presence or absence of comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), responsiveness with the MSAS item as an anchor, and calculated a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) using distribution methods. KEY RESULTS: Among 312 participants, the DEG was reliable (Cronbach's alpha 0.92). The mean (standard deviation) DEG score was 5.26 (2.36) (range 0-10) points. DEG scores correlated strongly with the MSAS shortness of breath distress-or-bothersome item (r=0.66) and moderately with GAD-7 categories (ρ=0.36). DEG scores were statistically significantly lower among patients with NYHA 1-2 compared to 3-4 [mean difference (standard error): 1.22 (0.27) points, p<0.01], and those without compared to with comorbid COPD [0.87 (0.27) points, p<0.01]. The DEG was highly sensitive to change, with MCID of 0.59-1.34 points, or 11-25% change. CONCLUSIONS: The novel, ultra-brief DEG measure is reliable, valid, and highly responsive. Future studies should evaluate the DEG's sensitivity to interventions, use anchor-based methods to triangulate MCID estimates, and determine its prognostic usefulness among patients with chronic cardiopulmonary and other diseases.
BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is a common and debilitating symptom that affects many different patient populations. Dyspnea measures should assess multiple domains. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of an ultra-brief, multi-dimensional dyspnea measure. DESIGN: We adapted the DEG from the PEG, a valid 3-item pain measure, to assess average dyspnea intensity (D), interference with enjoyment of life (E), and dyspnea burden with general activity (G). PARTICIPANTS: We used data from a multi-site randomized clinical trial among outpatients with heart failure. MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated reliability (Cronbach's alpha), concurrent validity with the Memorial-Symptom-Assessment-Scale (MSAS) shortness-of-breath distress-orbothersome item and 7-item Generalized-Anxiety-Disorder (GAD-7) scale, knowngroups validity with New-York-Heart-Association-Functional-Classification (NYHA) 1-2 or 3-4 and presence or absence of comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), responsiveness with the MSAS item as an anchor, and calculated a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) using distribution methods. KEY RESULTS: Among 312 participants, the DEG was reliable (Cronbach's alpha 0.92). The mean (standard deviation) DEG score was 5.26 (2.36) (range 0-10) points. DEG scores correlated strongly with the MSAS shortness of breath distress-or-bothersome item (r=0.66) and moderately with GAD-7 categories (ρ=0.36). DEG scores were statistically significantly lower among patients with NYHA 1-2 compared to 3-4 [mean difference (standard error): 1.22 (0.27) points, p<0.01], and those without compared to with comorbid COPD [0.87 (0.27) points, p<0.01]. The DEG was highly sensitive to change, with MCID of 0.59-1.34 points, or 11-25% change. CONCLUSIONS: The novel, ultra-brief DEG measure is reliable, valid, and highly responsive. Future studies should evaluate the DEG's sensitivity to interventions, use anchor-based methods to triangulate MCID estimates, and determine its prognostic usefulness among patients with chronic cardiopulmonary and other diseases.
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Paula M Meek; Robert Banzett; Mark B Parsall; Richard H Gracely; Richard M Schwartzstein; Robert Lansing Journal: Chest Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Janelle Yorke; Jeffrey Swigris; Anne-Marie Russell; Shakeeb H Moosavi; Georges Ng Man Kwong; Mark Longshaw; Paul W Jones Journal: Chest Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: R K Portenoy; H T Thaler; A B Kornblith; J M Lepore; H Friedlander-Klar; E Kiyasu; K Sobel; N Coyle; N Kemeny; L Norton Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1994 Impact factor: 9.162