Blog
About

18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The COPD assessment test and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire: are they equivalent in subjects with COPD?

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Background

          The chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) assessment test (CAT) is a short questionnaire that has facilitated health status measurements in subjects with COPD. However, it remains controversial as to whether the CAT can be used as a suitable substitute for the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). This study investigated the reliability and score distributions of the CAT and SGRQ and evaluated which factors contributed to health status for each questionnaire.

          Methods

          A total of 109 consecutive subjects with stable COPD from a single center were enrolled in this study. Each subject completed pulmonary function tests, exercise tests, and the following self-administered questionnaires: the Baseline Dyspnea Index, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the CAT, and SGRQ.

          Results

          Internal consistencies of CAT and SGRQ total scores were both excellent (Cronbach’s α coefficients =0.890 and 0.933). Statistically significant correlations were observed between CAT and SGRQ total scores ( R=0.668, P<0.001). Correlations of CAT scores with parameters related to pulmonary function, dyspnea, exercise performance, and psychological factors were inferior to correlations with those parameters with SGRQ total scores. Both multiple regression analyses and principal component analyses revealed that there were slight differences between SGRQ total scores and CAT scores.

          Conclusion

          The CAT is similar to SGRQ in terms of discriminating health status. However, we demonstrated that what is assessed by the CAT may differ slightly from what is measured by SGRQ.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 13

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

          The measurement of dyspnea. Contents, interobserver agreement, and physiologic correlates of two new clinical indexes.

          To improve the clinical measurement of dyspnea, we developed a baseline dyspnea index that rated the severity of dyspnea at a single state and a transition dyspnea index that denoted changes from that baseline. The scores in both indexes depend on ratings for three different categories: functional impairment; magnitude of task, and magnitude of effort. At the baseline state, dyspnea was rated in five grades from 0 (severe) to 4 (unimpaired) for each category. The ratings for each of the three categories were added to form a baseline focal score (range, 0 to 12). At the transition period, changes in dyspnea were rated by seven grades, ranging from -3 (major deterioration), to +3 (major improvement). The ratings for each of the three categories were added to form a transition focal score (range, -9 to +9). In 38 patients tested with respiratory disease, interobserver agreement was highly satisfactory for both indexes. The baseline focal score had the highest correlation (r = 0.60; P less than 0.001) with the 12-minute walking distance (12 MW), while significant, but lower, correlations existed for lung function. For the transition focal score, there was a significant correlation only with the 12 MW (r = 0.33; p = 0.04). These results indicate that dyspnea can receive a direct clinical rating that provides important information not disclosed by customary physiologic tests.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The COPD assessment test (CAT): response to pulmonary rehabilitation. A multicentre, prospective study.

            The COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) assessment test (CAT) is a recently introduced, simple to use patient-completed quality of life instrument that contains eight questions covering the impact of symptoms in COPD. It is not known how the CAT score performs in the context of clinical pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programmes or what the minimum clinically important difference is. The introduction of the CAT score as an outcome measure was prospectively studied by PR programmes across London. It was used alongside other measures including the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression score, the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea score and a range of different walking tests. Patients completed a 5-point anchor question used to assess overall response to PR from 'I feel much better' to 'I feel much worse'. Data were available for 261 patients with COPD participating in seven programmes: mean (SD) age 69.0 (9.0) years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) 51.1 (18.7) % predicted, MRC score 3.2 (1.0). Mean change in CAT score after PR was 2.9 (5.6) points, improving by 3.8 (6.1) points in those scoring 'much better' (n=162), and by 1.3(4.5) in those who felt 'a little better' (n=88) (p=0.002). Only eight individuals reported no difference after PR and three reported feeling 'a little worse', so comparison with these smaller groups was not possible. The CAT score is simple to implement as an outcome measure, it improves in response to PR and can distinguish categories of response.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The COPD assessment test: a systematic review.

              The COPD assessment test (CAT) is a self-administered questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life. We aimed to systematically evaluate the literature for reliability, validity, responsiveness and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of the CAT. Multiple databases were searched for studies analysing the psychometric properties of the CAT in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Two reviewers independently screened, selected and extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of relevant studies using the COSMIN checklist. From 792 records identified, 36 studies were included. The number of participants ranged from 45 to 6469, mean age from 56 to 73 years, and mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s from 39% to 98% predicted. Internal consistency (reliability) was 0.85-0.98, and test-retest reliability was 0.80-0.96. Convergent and longitudinal validity using Pearson's correlation coefficient were: SGRQ-C 0.69-0.82 and 0.63, CCQ 0.68-0.78 and 0.60, and mMRC 0.29-0.61 and 0.20, respectively. Scores differed with GOLD stages, exacerbation and mMRC grades. Mean scores decreased with pulmonary rehabilitation (2.2-3 units) and increased at exacerbation onset (4.7 units). Only one study with adequate methodology reported an MCID of 2 units and 3.3-3.8 units using the anchor-based approach and distribution-based approach, respectively. Most studies had fair methodological quality. We conclude that the studies support the reliability and validity of the CAT and that the tool is responsive to interventions, although the MCID remains debatable.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of COPD
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-9106
                1178-2005
                2016
                07 July 2016
                : 11
                : 1543-1551
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Tosei General Hospital, Seto, Japan
                [2 ]Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Medicine, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan
                [3 ]Department of Pulmonary Medicine, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Obu, Japan
                [4 ]Department of Rehabilitation, Tosei General Hospital, Seto, Japan
                [5 ]School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Seirei Christopher University, Hamamatsu, Japan
                [6 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Kinki University School of Medicine, Osakasayama, Japan
                [7 ]Data Research Section, Kondo P.P. Inc., Osaka, Japan
                [8 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine, Fujita Health University, Nagoya, Japan
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Hiroyuki Taniguchi, Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Tosei General Hospital, 160 Nishioiwake-cho, Seto, Aichi, Japan, Email taniguchi@ 123456tosei.or.jp
                Article
                copd-11-1543
                10.2147/COPD.S104947
                4940016
                27462150
                © 2016 Morishita-Katsu et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). 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.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article