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

      Convergent Validity and Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Maugeri Foundation Respiratory Failure Questionnaire (MRF-28) and the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire (VQ11)

      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.



          Short and easy questionnaires have been developed to assess the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), such as the Maugeri Foundation Respiratory Failure Questionnaire (MRF-28) and the COPD-specific HRQoL Questionnaire (VQ11). Both are valid, reliable, and sensitive, but their minimal clinically important differences (MCID) are unknown. Consequently, this study aimed to confirm the convergent validities of the MRF-28 and VQ11 and establish their MCID. A retrospective design was used to evaluate the effect of individual home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in 400 COPD patients.

          Patients and methods

          Exercise tolerance, anxiety and depression based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and HRQoL using three questionnaires (MRF-28, VQ11, and the Visual Simplified Respiratory Questionnaire: VSRQ) were assessed before and after an individualized home-based PR program (5 sessions of 30–45 mins/week for 8 weeks, including a weekly session supervised by a team member).


          PR improved all measured variables ( p < 0.0001). The correlations were significant ( p < 0.0001) between VSRQ and MRF-28 (r = −0.685 at baseline and r = −0.686 after the PR program), and between VSRQ and VQ11 (r = −0.691 at baseline and r = −0.753 after the PR program). Moreover, changes in score (delta between after and before PR program) of VSRQ were also significantly correlated ( p < 0.0001) to changes in score of MRF-28 (r = −0.372) and VQ11 (r = −0.423). Last, we calculated MCID of −5.2 and −2.0 units for MRF-28 and VQ11, respectively.


          The MRF-28 and VQ11 can be used in routine practice to evaluate the effects of PR on the HRQoL of COPD patients, with MCID of −5.2 and −2.0, respectively.

          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

            Measurement properties and interpretability of the Chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ).

            The chronic respiratory questionnaire, available as an interviewer and a self-administered instrument, includes 20 items across four domains: dyspnea (5 items), fatigue (4 items), emotional function (7 items), and mastery (4 items). When completing this instrument, patients rate their experience on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (maximum impairment) to 7 (no impairment). The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire has demonstrated excellent measurement properties for both discriminative and evaluative purposes and served as a model in numerous methodological studies in chronic airflow limitation and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We performed a systematic review of the literature on the chronic respiratory questionnaire to summarize the key qualities of the chronic respiratory questionnaire and to appraise the work regarding the minimal important difference of the chronic respiratory questionnaire. This paper includes a revision of our initial definition of the minimal important difference and a methodological framework for using anchor based approaches to establish the minimal important difference pioneered by Jaeschke and colleagues. Other approaches to evaluate the minimal important difference include distribution-based methods and panel-based methods. Investigators have used all of these approaches to establish the minimal important difference for the chronic respiratory questionnaire and the results are in general agreement with the minimal important difference of 0.5 for the mean domain scores of the chronic respiratory questionnaire. As a result of this literature review and discussion at the workshop, we established several research objectives. These objectives include the exploration of presentation of quality of life information and prospective anchor-based approaches.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evaluation of the minimal important difference for the feeling thermometer and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire in patients with chronic airflow obstruction.

              The chronic respiratory questionnaire (CRQ), the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and the feeling thermometer (FT) evaluate change in health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with chronic airflow limitation (CAL). Although the interpretability, and in particular the minimal important difference (MID) in score changes, is well established for the CRQ, this is not the case for the SGRQ and FT. The objective of our study is to explore the interpretation of the SGRQ and FT. We analyzed data from 84 patients who completed the CRQ, SGRQ, and FT before beginning pulmonary rehabilitation and 3 months later. We calculated correlations between the four CRQ domains (dyspnea, fatigue, emotional function, and mastery) and the three SGRQ domains (symptoms, activities, and impact), the SGRQ total score, and the FT. When Pearson's correlations were >/=0.5, we constructed regression equations and used the slope to calculate the change in SGRQ and FT score that corresponded to a change in CRQ score of 0.5 (the MID). Having established MID for SGRQ we than used a similar approach to examine the relation between the SGRQ and FT results. Comparison with the CRQ dyspnea domain suggested the MID in SGRQ total score is approximately 3.05 with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) ranging from 0.39 to 5.71 and a change of 5.67 (95% CI 3.43-7.92) represents a moderate change (1.0 on the CRQ dyspnea domain). The MID for the FT based on the CRQ fatigue domain was 6.1 (95% CI 1.87-10.28). The FT MID based on the SGRQ activities domain, impacts domain, and total score were, respectively, 7.4 (95% CI 3.44-11.35), 5.6 (95% CI 1.6-9.64), and 5.9 (95% CI 1.97-9.78). An MID for the SGRQ approximates the previously suggested estimate of 4 on a scale of 0 to 100. The MID for the FT in patients with CAL is approximately 5 to 8 units on the 0 to 100 scale. These MID estimates should facilitate interpretation of clinical trials in which outcome measures include the SGRQ or FT.

                Author and article information

                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                13 December 2019
                : 14
                : 2895-2903
                [1 ]Université de Rouen-Normandie, UFR STAPS, CETAPS, EA 3832 , Mont Saint Aignan F-76821, France
                [2 ]Centre Hospitalier de Béthune, Service de Pneumologie et de Réhabilitation Respiratoire , Beuvry F-62660, France
                [3 ]FormAction Santé , Pérenchies F-59840, France
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Jérémy B Coquart Université de Rouen-Normandie, UFR STAPS, CETAPS , EA 3832, Mont Saint AignanF-76821, FranceTel +33 235 146 775 Email
                © 2019 Coquart 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
                Figures: 1, Tables: 5, References: 42, Pages: 9
                Original Research


                Comment on this article