Cargando…
The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials
BACKGROUND: Critical needs for treatment trials in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) include assessing response to treatment, evaluating symptom severity, and translation of symptom questionnaires into multiple languages. We evaluated the previously validated Reflux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2008
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2390523/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18447946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-6-31 |
_version_ | 1782155314491031552 |
---|---|
author | Shaw, Michael Dent, John Beebe, Timothy Junghard, Ola Wiklund, Ingela Lind, Tore Johnsson, Folke |
author_facet | Shaw, Michael Dent, John Beebe, Timothy Junghard, Ola Wiklund, Ingela Lind, Tore Johnsson, Folke |
author_sort | Shaw, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Critical needs for treatment trials in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) include assessing response to treatment, evaluating symptom severity, and translation of symptom questionnaires into multiple languages. We evaluated the previously validated Reflux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ) for internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness to change during treatment and the concordance between RDQ and specialty physician assessment of symptom severity, after translation into Swedish and Norwegian. METHODS: Performance of the RDQ after translation into Swedish and Norwegian was evaluated in 439 patients with presumed GERD in a randomized, double-blind trial of active treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. RESULTS: The responsiveness was excellent across three RDQ indicators. Mean change scores in patients on active treatment were large, also reflected in effect sizes that ranged from a low of 1.05 (dyspepsia) to a high of 2.05 (heartburn) and standardized response means 0.99 (dyspepsia) and 1.52 (heartburn). A good positive correlation between physician severity ratings and RDQ scale scores was seen. The internal consistency reliability using alpha coefficients of the scales, regardless of language, ranged from 0.67 to 0.89. CONCLUSION: The results provide strong evidence that the RDQ is amenable to translation and represents a viable instrument for assessing response to treatment, and symptom severity. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2390523 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2008 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-23905232008-05-21 The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials Shaw, Michael Dent, John Beebe, Timothy Junghard, Ola Wiklund, Ingela Lind, Tore Johnsson, Folke Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: Critical needs for treatment trials in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) include assessing response to treatment, evaluating symptom severity, and translation of symptom questionnaires into multiple languages. We evaluated the previously validated Reflux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ) for internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness to change during treatment and the concordance between RDQ and specialty physician assessment of symptom severity, after translation into Swedish and Norwegian. METHODS: Performance of the RDQ after translation into Swedish and Norwegian was evaluated in 439 patients with presumed GERD in a randomized, double-blind trial of active treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. RESULTS: The responsiveness was excellent across three RDQ indicators. Mean change scores in patients on active treatment were large, also reflected in effect sizes that ranged from a low of 1.05 (dyspepsia) to a high of 2.05 (heartburn) and standardized response means 0.99 (dyspepsia) and 1.52 (heartburn). A good positive correlation between physician severity ratings and RDQ scale scores was seen. The internal consistency reliability using alpha coefficients of the scales, regardless of language, ranged from 0.67 to 0.89. CONCLUSION: The results provide strong evidence that the RDQ is amenable to translation and represents a viable instrument for assessing response to treatment, and symptom severity. BioMed Central 2008-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC2390523/ /pubmed/18447946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-6-31 Text en Copyright © 2008 Shaw et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Shaw, Michael Dent, John Beebe, Timothy Junghard, Ola Wiklund, Ingela Lind, Tore Johnsson, Folke The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
title | The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
title_full | The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
title_fullStr | The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
title_full_unstemmed | The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
title_short | The Reflux Disease Questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
title_sort | reflux disease questionnaire: a measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2390523/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18447946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-6-31 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shawmichael therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT dentjohn therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT beebetimothy therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT junghardola therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT wiklundingela therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT lindtore therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT johnssonfolke therefluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT shawmichael refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT dentjohn refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT beebetimothy refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT junghardola refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT wiklundingela refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT lindtore refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials AT johnssonfolke refluxdiseasequestionnaireameasureforassessmentoftreatmentresponseinclinicaltrials |