+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development of a Standard Set of Outcome Domains and Proposed Measures for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Primary Care Physical Therapy Practice in the Netherlands: a Modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Standardization of measures in a common set opens the opportunity to learn from differences in treatment outcomes which can be used for improving the quality of care. Furthermore, a standard set can provide the basis for development of quality indicators and is therefore useful for quality improvement and public reporting purposes. The aim of this study was to develop a standard set of outcome domains and proposed measures for patients with COPD in Dutch primary care physical therapy practice, including a proposal to stratify patients in subgroups.

          Material and methods

          A consensus-driven modified RAND-UCLA appropriateness method was conducted with relevant stakeholders (patients, physical therapists, researchers, policy makers and health insurers) in Dutch primary physical therapy care in eight steps: (1) literature search, (2) first online survey, (3) patient interviews, (4) expert meeting, resulting in a concept standard set and methods to identify subgroups' (5) consensus meeting, (6) expert meeting (7) second online survey and (8) final approval of an advisory board resulting of the approved standard set.


          Five outcome domains were selected for COPD: physical capacity, muscle strength, physical activity, dyspnea and quality of life. A total of 21 measures were rated and discussed. Finally, eight measures were included, of which four mandatory measures: Characteristics of practices and physical therapists, Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) for quality of life, Global Perceived Effect (GPE) for experience, 6-mins Walk Test (6-MWT) for physical capacity; two conditional measures: Hand-Held Dynamometer (HHD) (with Microfet™) for Quadriceps strength, Medical Research Council Dyspnea (MRC) for monitoring dyspnea; and two exploratory measures: Accelerometry for physical activity, and the Assessment of Burden of COPD tool (ABC). To identify subgroups, a method described in the Dutch standard of care from the Lung Alliance was included.


          This study described the development of a standard set of outcome domains and proposed measures for patients with COPD in primary care physical therapy. Each measure was accepted for relevance and feasibility by the involved stakeholders. The set is currently used in daily practice and tested on validity and reliability in a pilot for the development of quality indicators.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

          Widespread application of pulmonary rehabilitation (also known as respiratory rehabilitation) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be preceded by demonstrable improvements in function (health-related quality of life, functional and maximal exercise capacity) attributable to the programmes. This review updates the review reported in 2006.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2017 Report: GOLD Executive Summary.

            This Executive Summary of the Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of COPD, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 Report focuses primarily on the revised and novel parts of the document. The most significant changes include: (i) the assessment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has been refined to separate the spirometric assessment from symptom evaluation. ABCD groups are now proposed to be derived exclusively from patient symptoms and their history of exacerbations; (ii) for each of the groups A to D, escalation strategies for pharmacological treatments are proposed; (iii) the concept of de-escalation of therapy is introduced in the treatment assessment scheme; (iv)non-pharmacological therapies are comprehensively presented and (v) the importance of co-morbid conditions in managing COPD is reviewed.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pulmonary rehabilitation following exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

              Pulmonary rehabilitation has become a cornerstone in the management of patients with stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Systematic reviews have shown large and important clinical effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in these patients. However, in unstable COPD patients who have recently suffered an exacerbation, the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation are less established. To assess the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation after COPD exacerbations on future hospital admissions (primary outcome) and other patient-important outcomes (mortality, health-related quality of life and exercise capacity). Trials were identified from searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDRO and the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials. Searches were current as of March 2010. Randomized controlled trials comparing pulmonary rehabilitation of any duration after exacerbation of COPD with conventional care. Pulmonary rehabilitation programmes needed to include at least physical exercise. Control groups received conventional community care without rehabilitation. We calculated pooled odds ratios and weighted mean differences (MD) using random-effects models. We requested missing data from the authors of the primary studies. We identified nine trials involving 432 patients. Pulmonary rehabilitation significantly reduced hospital admissions (pooled odds ratio 0.22 [95% CI 0.08 to 0.58], number needed to treat (NNT) 4 [95% CI 3 to 8], over 25 weeks) and mortality (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.84), NNT 6 [95% CI 5 to 30] over 107 weeks). Effects of pulmonary rehabilitation on health-related quality of life were well above the minimal important difference when measured by the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (MD for dyspnea, fatigue, emotional function and mastery domains between 0.81 (fatigue; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.45) and 0.97 (dyspnea; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.58)) and the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire total score (MD -9.88; 95% CI -14.40 to -5.37); impacts domain (MD -13.94; 95% CI -20.37 to -7.51) and for activity limitation domain (MD -9.94; 95% CI -15.98 to -3.89)). The symptoms domain of the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire showed no significant improvement. Pulmonary rehabilitation significantly improved exercise capacity and the improvement was above the minimally important difference (six-minute walk test (MD 77.70 meters; 95% CI 12.21 to 143.20) and shuttle walk test (MD 64.35; 95% CI 41.28 to 87.43)). No adverse events were reported in three studies. Evidence from nine small studies of moderate methodological quality, suggests that pulmonary rehabilitation is a highly effective and safe intervention to reduce hospital admissions and mortality and to improve health-related quality of life in COPD patients who have recently suffered an exacerbation of COPD.

                Author and article information

                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                28 November 2019
                : 14
                : 2649-2661
                [1 ]Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare , Nijmegen, Netherlands
                [2 ]Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Human Movement Studies , Utrecht, Netherlands
                [3 ]Association for Quality in Physical Therapy (SKF) , Zwolle, Netherlands
                [4 ]CZ Healthcare Insurance , Tilburg, Netherlands
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Arie C Verburg Radboud University Medical Center , 114 IQ Healthcare, PO Box 9101, Nijmegen6500 HB, NetherlandsTel +31-243668198Fax +31-243540166 Email
                © 2019 Verburg et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (

                Page count
                Tables: 4, References: 53, Pages: 13
                Funding support for this study was provided by Dutch health insurer CZ. The sponsor had no influence on the process or outcomes of the paper.
                Original Research

                Respiratory medicine

                delphi, copd, prems, proms, quality measures, outcome domains, standard set


                Comment on this article