S C Lareau1, P M Meek, P J Roos. 1. Jerry L. Pettis Veterans Administration Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Calif 92357, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Describe the process of development and testing to reduce the Pulmonary Functional Status and Dyspnea Questionnaire (PFSDQ) from 164 items to a modified questionnaire (the PFSDQ-M) consisting of 40 items. DESIGN: Instrument development and testing for reliability, validity, and practicality. SETTING: Hospital-based outpatients. PATIENTS: Testing was done on three groups of clinically stable patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a secondary analysis of 131 subjects for item selection, reliability, and validity; 50 additional subjects evaluating the PFSDQ-M for internal consistency, test-retest correlations, and construct validity; and 34 subjects from a longitudinal study for responsiveness. OUTCOME MEASURES: PFSDQ, PFSDQ-M, and spirometry. RESULTS: The practicality of the PFSDQ-M was supported by its sixth- to seventh-grade reading level, ease of reading (Flesch-Kincaid 69.5), self-administration, brief period for testing (7 minutes initially, 6 minutes on repeated testing), and limited missing data (< 8%). Reliability of the three components was supported by internal consistency alpha = 0.93 for change experienced by the patient with activities (CA), 0.95 for dyspnea with activities (DA), and 0.95 for fatigue with activities (FA). Good stability of the PFSDQ-M was demonstrated on test-retest; r = 0.70 for change, 0.83 for dyspnea, and 0.79 for fatigue (with activities). The usefulness of the PFSDQ-M in discriminating between dyspnea scores in patients based on their rate of deterioration in lung function was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The PFSDQ was modified by reducing the number of activities evaluated, standardizing scaling formats, and adding a fatigue component. Findings suggest that the PFSDQ-M demonstrates initial reliability; good validity estimates, as seen with the factor analysis, and the dyspnea and activity scores appear responsive to physiologic changes in lung function over time.
OBJECTIVE: Describe the process of development and testing to reduce the Pulmonary Functional Status and Dyspnea Questionnaire (PFSDQ) from 164 items to a modified questionnaire (the PFSDQ-M) consisting of 40 items. DESIGN: Instrument development and testing for reliability, validity, and practicality. SETTING: Hospital-based outpatients. PATIENTS: Testing was done on three groups of clinically stable patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a secondary analysis of 131 subjects for item selection, reliability, and validity; 50 additional subjects evaluating the PFSDQ-M for internal consistency, test-retest correlations, and construct validity; and 34 subjects from a longitudinal study for responsiveness. OUTCOME MEASURES: PFSDQ, PFSDQ-M, and spirometry. RESULTS: The practicality of the PFSDQ-M was supported by its sixth- to seventh-grade reading level, ease of reading (Flesch-Kincaid 69.5), self-administration, brief period for testing (7 minutes initially, 6 minutes on repeated testing), and limited missing data (< 8%). Reliability of the three components was supported by internal consistency alpha = 0.93 for change experienced by the patient with activities (CA), 0.95 for dyspnea with activities (DA), and 0.95 for fatigue with activities (FA). Good stability of the PFSDQ-M was demonstrated on test-retest; r = 0.70 for change, 0.83 for dyspnea, and 0.79 for fatigue (with activities). The usefulness of the PFSDQ-M in discriminating between dyspnea scores in patients based on their rate of deterioration in lung function was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The PFSDQ was modified by reducing the number of activities evaluated, standardizing scaling formats, and adding a fatigue component. Findings suggest that the PFSDQ-M demonstrates initial reliability; good validity estimates, as seen with the factor analysis, and the dyspnea and activity scores appear responsive to physiologic changes in lung function over time.
Authors: Jeffrey J Swigris; Janelle Yorke; David B Sprunger; Christopher Swearingen; Theodore Pincus; Roland M du Bois; Kevin K Brown; Aryeh Fischer Journal: Respir Med Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 3.415
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: Rodrigo Cerqueira Borges; Celso R F Carvalho; Alexandra Siqueira Colombo; Mariucha Pereira da Silva Borges; Francisco Garcia Soriano Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Patricia P Katz; Steven Gregorich; Mark Eisner; Laura Julian; Hubert Chen; Edward Yelin; Paul D Blanc Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: George S Alexopoulos; Jo Anne Sirey; Samprit Banerjee; Danielle S Jackson; Dimitris N Kiosses; Cristina Pollari; Richard S Novitch; Amanda Artis; Patrick J Raue Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 4.105